On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 07:25:48PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > Hi Sam, > > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 09:49:35 +0200 > Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 02:04:12PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > Hi experts. > > > > > > I think all the macros with CONFIG_ prefix are supposed to be > > > defined in Kconfig. > > > But I've been long wondering why there exists one exception: > > > CONFIG_SHELL. > > > > > > Is there any historical, or special reason? > > It has been like this as far back as I remmeber. > > I assume that one has planned to set the shell in Kconfig back then. > > > > > Is it good to rename it to KBUILD_SHELL or something else? > > Please do so, to free up the CONFIG_ namespace. > > > > I the end Michal will decide if he want this cleanup. > > On the top of my head I see no problems in doing this, > > but maybe there are some out-of-tree modules or similar > > we need to consider... > > Thanks for your commet. > > Another question popped up. > > > CONFIG_SHELL := $(shell if [ -x "$$BASH" ]; then echo $$BASH; \ > else if [ -x /bin/bash ]; then echo /bin/bash; \ > else echo sh; fi ; fi) > > > If bash is not found on the system, CONFIG_SHELL falls back to "sh". > > Does it mean, all shell scripts are written as sh-compatible ? Not all - but most. All shell scripts that are invoked with $(CONFIG_SHELL) must be sh-compatible, or in practice dash compatible as well as bash compatible. The preference is bash as expressed with the above code. Sam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
