On Monday 06 July 2009 13:28:00 Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 4:38 AM, Francesco RUNDO wrote:
> > I've already fixed the same issue you reported. I've tested it
> > successfully.
> >
> > Subrata has already merged my patch (please, find it in attachment).
> >
> > Please, check it before to submit another patch.
>
> At the end of the day, the real problem is that we're not using the
> --with- functionality in autoconf, e.g. --with-cgroups, and instead
> we're hacking a lot of noise into Makefile's.

selectively compiling groups of code needs to be thought out before we start 
throwing --with-foo options at the problem.  otherwise we'll still end up with 
crap, just in a different form.

> I can tell at first glance that that Makefile is a mess anyhow,
> because it's referencing _hardcoded_ /proc references and as such will
> fail to cross-compile properly if the target or the host are setup
> differently from one another, in the following two scenarios:

yes, the merged patch and that makefile suck.  there should never be any 
filesystem check in a Makefile anymore.  while peeking in /proc is somewhat 
forgivable, looking for headers never is ok.  we have autoconf tests now and 
Gowri's approach looks like the correct one.
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Reply via email to