Hi Masahiro, On 9 November 2015 at 09:37, Nishanth Menon <n...@ti.com> wrote: > On 11/09/2015 10:03 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >> 2015-11-09 1:38 GMT+09:00 Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com>: >>> On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 09:56:18AM -0600, menon.nisha...@gmail.com wrote: >>>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Conceptually fine with me. Do we really need a config option for it >>>>> tho? >>>> >>>> I was following the lines of CONFIG_CREATE_ARCH_SYMLINK here. Is there >>>> some reason why you'd not want it so? >>> >>> Masahiro? >>> >> >> Is this an improvement? >> >> >> I am unhappy because I was hoping >> we could stop creating symbolic links during building >> in a long run.
But how? I don't see that it is possible if we want to have a sensible prefix for each include. > > OK. what do we do? > option 1: > #include "..common/xyz.h" > 141 something usage in board files do this for now.. > > option 2: > -I...common (auto generated - original patch) > #include "xyz.h" > we dont like that since it does not tell us that xyz.h is a > board-common header. > > option 3: > #include <board-common/xyz.h> > > this needs a soft link which we dont like either. Well, I like it :-) > > are there any other ways to do this? > > -- > Regards, > Nishanth Menon > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
