On 9/24/10, matt mooney <mfm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 16:39 Fri 24 Sep , T Dent wrote: >> On 9/24/10, matt mooney <mfmooney@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 11:25 AM, T Dent <tdent48227@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> I changed every makefile in the staging directory to use the proper >> >> ccflags-y option instead of EXTRA_CFLAGS. It builds also :) . >> > >> > Um, you didn't do a lot of these right. Maybe you should look into why >> > the change was made in the first place. For semantic reasons, I was >> > also changing the first assignment to ":=" from "+=". >> >> I can resend them with the a small modification to the patch files if you >> want. > > After looking at more of them, my "a lot" was a little bit of an > overstatement. The first few I randomly looked at happen to use the > incorrect > pattern, but most are simple without relying on a variable. Yeah, I think > you > should resubmit with a "[PATCH v2]." The pattern is: > > ifeq ($(FOO),y) > EXTRA_CFLAGS := <flags> > endif > > changes to: > > ccflags-$(FOO) := <flags> > > Also, the rest of the kernel tree has been done except drivers/media; > however, I > am going to email them in a little bit asking if some consolidation is > possible > due to every driver there relying on a few flags. So thanks for the help > (though > is was a good thing I was saving staging for last)! > > -mfm > > Okay i'll resubmit the patches when I edit it how you said. Thanks, Tracey -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
