> -----Original Message----- > From: Robert P. J. Day [mailto:rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 10:38 PM > To: Premi, Sanjeev > Cc: U-Boot Version 2 (barebox) > Subject: RE: "make distclean" doesn't remove generated MLO file > > On Tue, 7 Feb 2012, Premi, Sanjeev wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Robert P. J. Day [mailto:rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 10:33 PM > > > To: Premi, Sanjeev > > > Cc: U-Boot Version 2 (barebox) > > > Subject: RE: "make distclean" doesn't remove generated MLO file > > > > > > On Tue, 7 Feb 2012, Premi, Sanjeev wrote: > > > > > > > I usually compile both stages together with a 'make clean' in > > > > between, hence decided to preserve MLO. Makes it easy > to copy both > > > > MLO and barebox.bin at same time. > > > > > > is there any sort of requirement about cleaning in > between those two > > > steps? if there is, that's a potential "gotcha" that should be > > > clearly documented. > > > > No "gotcha" that I know of - but just a habit! > > i figured as much. but under the circumstances, i think removing > MLO should be part of CLEAN_FILES given its obvious relationship to > things like barebox.bin. philosophically, it just makes more sense. > and on that note, i will now shut up about it. I noted in earlier response: > Otherwise, yes, MLO goes better with CLEAN_FILES. So, you are right. Let us wait if there is any other opinion on this. ~sanjeev _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
