Re: Linux 2.6.0-test6

[Jörn Engel]

On Sun, 28 September 2003 20:46:42 +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 10:37:36AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > This, btw, is a pretty common thing. I wonder what we could do to make 
> > sure that different architectures wouldn't have so different include file 
> > structures. It's happened _way_ too often.
> > 
> > Any ideas?
> 
> Without too much thinking....
> Would it help to require all major[1] header files to include all the
> header files needed for them to compile?
> We could make that part of the build process or we could make that an
> optional step.
> 
> Obviously that would not solve any issues in asm-$(ARCH).
> 
> [1] There are ~600 files in include/linux - we could pick up the
> 50 most important and checkcompile them.

How about a check_headers target that roughly works like this:

for (all header files in include/linux and include/asm) {
	echo "#include <$HEADER>" > header.c
	make header.o
	rm header.c header.o
}

Did a quick test for linux/fs.h in -test5 and it compiled fine, but
broke after removing some random #include.

Another thing, Sam, "make header.o" causes make to call itself
indefinitely.  Had to "make somedir/header.o".  Not sure if you
consider this to be a bug, your decision.

Jörn

-- 
Fools ignore complexity.  Pragmatists suffer it.
Some can avoid it.  Geniuses remove it.
-- Perlis's Programming Proverb #58, SIGPLAN Notices, Sept.  1982
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/