On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 19:39 -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote: > On 07/08/2012 04:14 PM, Christopher James Halse Rogers wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Christopher James Halse Rogers > > <christopher.halse.rog...@canonical.com> > > --- > > src/mesa/sources.mak | 9 +++++---- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/src/mesa/sources.mak b/src/mesa/sources.mak > > index 16b1c39..87191fd 100644 > > --- a/src/mesa/sources.mak > > +++ b/src/mesa/sources.mak > > @@ -4,8 +4,8 @@ SRCDIR ?= . > > > > # this is part of MAIN_FILES > > MAIN_ES_FILES = \ > > - $(SRCDIR)/main/api_exec_es1.c \ > > - $(SRCDIR)/main/api_exec_es2.c > > + $(TOP)/src/mesa/main/api_exec_es1.c \ > > + $(TOP)/src/mesa/main/api_exec_es2.c > > Could we use $(top_builddir) instead of $(TOP)? As your first patch > demonstrates, there are really two top-level directories, so $(TOP) is > ambiguous/confusing. I'd rather see us stop using it, for clarity.
It's included in a number of non-automake Makefiles, where IIUC $(top_builddir) is not normally defined. On the other hand, making these Makefiles define $(top_builddir) instead of $(TOP) would be easy, and probably makes sense given the transition to autotools. I'll do that.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
