On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 02:38:52PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:16:23PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf escreveu: > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 01:45:22PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Em Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:38:15AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf escreveu: > > > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 01:25:47PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo > > > > wrote: > > > Which is different from what the kernel does in its main Makefile: > > > > # Make variables (CC, etc...) > > > AS = $(CROSS_COMPILE)as > > > LD = $(CROSS_COMPILE)ld > > > CC = $(CROSS_COMPILE)gcc > > > > I wonder if we could settle in one of these styles or if there is really > > > a reason to be creative :-) > > > > Better, all this could go to tools/scripts/Makefile.include? > > > Yeah, I agree that it would be good to come up with a common and > > consistent approach tools-wide if possible. > > <SNOP> > > So 'allow-override' would probably be a good option. > > Humm, my preference is to make tools/ look like the kernel, and the > kernel doesn't use that allow-override thing, right? So perhaps add what > is missing to make it look exactly like the kernel and then ditch this > allow-override thing?
Steven explained his reason for allow-override in the comment above it, please make sure the new solution follows that > > What about having all this in a single place in tools/script/? maybe tools/script/Makefile.comp jirka
