Dear Mike Frysinger,
In message <201012271146.22205.vap...@gentoo.org> you wrote:
>
> > Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> > > This move linker option used by the last of u-boot in LDFLAGS_u-boot
> > > variable. And the option to use in ld uses LDFLAGS variable.
> >
> > Can you please explain why this would be needed?
>
> he explained in the previous thread why we need to split things. there are
> flags that are needed for all linker options and there are flags needed just
> for the final u-boot link.
Such an explanation belongs into the commit message.
> > > -LDFLAGS += --gc-sections -m elf32bfin
> > > +LDFLAGS_u-boot += --gc-sections
> >
> > The name "LDFLAGS_u-boot" may actually work here, but iut is
> > inconsistent with other such variables names, and using '-' in a name
> > is probably not a good idea either.
>
> it isnt inconsistent. the convention is $(XFLAGS_$(@F)) and we just happen
> to
Can you please point me to an example where this has been used in
U-Boot before? Or why do you call this a convention?
I fail to see a reason this is needed or even useful here.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
The sight of death frightens them [Earthers].
-- Kras the Klingon, "Friday's Child", stardate 3497.2
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
