Patrick Georgi wrote:
> Am 25.09.2010 00:56, schrieb Peter Stuge:
> > DOH! Yes of course. :) Is it too ugly to add a compile step to
> > expand the macro into build.h ?
> While keeping all the macros that are in build.h alive? Yes.
And it is the same as the previous date command I guess..
Too ugly even if done right at the beginning?
--8<-- build_time.c
int main() {
printf("#define TIME \"%s\"\n#define DATE \"%s\"\n",__TIME__,__DATE__);
return 0;
}
-->8--
build.h: build_time
build_time > build.ht
echo ... >> build.ht
> I guess, the real question is how many times these values are used in
> the first place. As far as I can see, it's only for the banners of
> romstage and ramstage. Not exactly crucial.
No, but is there a point in having the timestamp be the same? Maybe
there's actually a point in having them be different!
//Peter
--
coreboot mailing list: [email protected]
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
