Am Dienstag, den 02.09.2008, 13:47 -0700 schrieb Colin D Bennett: > On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 22:43:54 +0300 > Vesa Jääskeläinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Robert Millan wrote: > > > I don't remember that discussion well; ISTR I complained. Maybe > > > that stopped it? Anyway, as long as it's user-selectable it's not > > > a problem for me. Maybe I even end up using it ;-)
This only needs to be the default then you Robert will end up using it ;) > I have held off on doing this with all new variables, because it would > mean changing *every* reference to the toolchain variables. I found > that by simply overriding them, it was really nonintrusive, in > general. However, there were developers that objected to the > overriding. > Honourly I'm exactly your opion. The linux primary kernel Makefile clearly says how it works, I haven't bothered to check the other files how exactly they implemented it. I doubt that it would help me. For grub2 these overrides seems to be the best solution as long as nobody is willing/able to rewrite the whole build system. There exists even a thing called `GNU automake' which converts Makefile.am files to Makefile.in I never used it though, so I don't really know if it would be easier with it then in that ruby stuff currently used. I'd really love to have this, but if these overrides are not acceptable then I doubt we will have it ever. I would need ages to find out how to do it with that ruby stuff or even how to rewrite the whole build system :( I myself wrote only some small little Makefiles not Makefile.am not Makefile.in but a final small Makefile. -- Felix Zielcke _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
