From: Mike F. <va...@ge...> - 2009-07-09 00:42:18
|
On Wednesday 08 July 2009 20:26:37 Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Mike Frysinger<va...@ge...> wrote: > > for the toolchain, do you purposefully only document CC and CFLAGS ? > > Where did I do that? README.mk-devel > > i'm not familiar with this "MAKEOPTS=';'" thing you refer to. what's > > that all about ? > > -r, --no-builtin-rules > Eliminate use of the built-in implicit rules. Also clear > out the default list of suffixes for suffix rules. > > There isn't a way to disable -r in make-3.81 except by removing it > from MAKEOPTS (that's how it was enabled in our make system at Cisco > in my group). `MAKEOPTS=;' is the quick way out. Nasty PITA... doesnt that clobber -j and -l and similar ? rather than help the user, spank them for it. in the .mk, you can add a findstring on the MAKEOPTS for "r" and $(error) out if found. > > master_rules.mk shouldnt be a '-include' ... we want an error if that > > doesnt exist > > I only did that to ensure that this commit could go in, irrespective > of PATCH 3/4, but I agree, it should be enabled once both changes are > committed. dont worry about it ... assume they're going in as a set > > your %.a rule is missing a call to ranlib on the archive > > Ok. How do I do that call exactly? > > ar [blah] > ranlib [blah] > > maybe? ranlib only needs one argument -- the archive -mike |