Re: [patch 2/3, resend] kbuild: improve option checking, Kbuild.include cleanup

[Oleg Verych]

On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 03:36:47PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
[]
> Also please don't add random whitespace, Makefiles are no C files, so 
> different rules apply.

Concerning whitespaces. Unfortunately only after installing i386
distro and checking that `-mcpu' error, i've realized what exactly
whitespace you mean, doc! 

    cc-option-yn = $(call cc-option, "y", "n", $(1))

vs.

    cc-option-yn = $(call cc-option,"y","n", $(1))

gives:

    + gcc ... -mtune=i386 -S -xc /dev/null -o /dev/shm/linux-2.6.20/.22730.null
(0) + echo ' y'

vs.

    + gcc ... -mtune=i386 -S -xc /dev/null -o /dev/shm/linux-2.6.20/.22231.null
(1) + echo y

and here sh1t hits the fun.

I always wondered where are all that whitespaces appearing in gcc
command line -- somebody adds them in makefiles, somebody don't, like
in this comments:

    # cc-option
    # Usage: cflags-y += $(call cc-option, -march=winchip-c6, -march=i586)
                                          ^                  ^
further this is used as this:

    #-mtune exists since gcc 3.4
    HAS_MTUNE       := $(call cc-option-yn, -mtune=i386)
(2) ifeq ($(HAS_MTUNE),y)
    tune            = $(call cc-option,-mtune=$(1),) [note: no whitespace]
    else
    tune            = $(call cc-option,-mcpu=$(1),)
    endif

    [...]

    cflags-$(CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII)    += -march=i686 $(call tune,pentium3)
    cflags-$(CONFIG_MPENTIUMM)      += -march=i686 $(call tune,pentium3)

(2) conflicts with (0), but OK with (1).

Summary: is it better to fix comments, as they are missling?

Thanks, Roman!
____
-
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/