On Wed, 2020-04-01 at 01:03 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 8:02 PM Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It's really useful to be able to build object files separately, but as > > if it was part of the kernel (so e.g. with all the gcc flags, include > > paths, etc.). [] > So, there were lots of cases where single builds did not work: > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-kbuild/msg21921.html > > The way to do this correctly is to > descend directories one by one, parsing Makefiles. > > With no entry in obj-y/m, > Kbuild cannot determine where to build that object. > > > At the very least, can we find a way to reduce the typing overhead for > > testing one-offs like that? 'make STANDALONE=1 test.o' or something? > > Probably, I do not want to do this. > > Supporting everybody's demand is not a good idea. > So, I draw a line somewhere. > > Saving some typing is less important. I too find this regression less than desirable. make <single_object> is/was quite useful even if it didn't always work.
