Re: [PATCH] Top Makefile: tiny correction on `make help`

[Cao jin]

Mr Masahiro,

On 06/06/2017 09:47 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi Cao,
> 
> 
> 2017-05-29 12:21 GMT+09:00 Cao jin <caoj.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> The help info of `make -C=1` is little confusing, make it clear.
> 
> `make C=1` instead of `make -C=1`
> 
> 
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  Makefile | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
>> index efa267a..b34a34d 100644
>> --- a/Makefile
>> +++ b/Makefile
>> @@ -1417,7 +1417,7 @@ help:
>>         @echo  '  make V=0|1 [targets] 0 => quiet build (default), 1 => verbose build'
>>         @echo  '  make V=2   [targets] 2 => give reason for rebuild of target'
>>         @echo  '  make O=dir [targets] Locate all output files in "dir", including .config'
>> -       @echo  '  make C=1   [targets] Check all c source with $$CHECK (sparse by default)'
>> +       @echo  '  make C=1   [targets] Check re-compiled c source only with $$CHECK (sparse by default)'
>>         @echo  '  make C=2   [targets] Force check of all c source with $$CHECK'
>>         @echo  '  make RECORDMCOUNT_WARN=1 [targets] Warn about ignored mcount sections'
>>         @echo  '  make W=n   [targets] Enable extra gcc checks, n=1,2,3 where'
> 
> Which phrase is qualified by "only"?
> 
> [1] re-compiled c source only
> [2] only with $$CHECK
> 
> I know [1] is what you mean (sorry for my nitpicking).
> 

You are right, after reading it again, I myself have the same feeling as
you...

> 
> Perhaps, "Check only re-compiled c source with $$CHECK" is even clearer?
> 
> (or, just drop "only" because "re-compiled c source" is understandable enough ?)

I prefer the latter one.

> 
> 
> Could you use "kbuild: " instead of "Top Makefile" in the subject?
> 

Sure.
Thanks very much for your suggestion:)

-- 
Sincerely,
Cao jin