On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> > What would be wrong with just splitting it the other way, ie make OX_OBJS
> > be the expanded (but not ordered) list?
> >
> > That should take care of it, no?
>
> As an aside: remember you mentioned we should try to go 100% OX_OBJS
> anyway, eliminating O_OBJS completely...
The only problem is that those unfortunate people without tons of
CPU-power would get really fed up with the extra "made depend" overhead.
So as a less drastic step we should just make it more of a hint, and less
of a design that impacts the link-order..
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 21:00:28 EST