> > currently working on HAL and HAL targets (ACPI, MP, UP and so on), I > > discovered a quite bad issue in our build process. > > Just look at the function HalInitSystem@8 (halinit.c), depending on the > > build target we don't add the same code (look at CONFIG_SMP, which is only > > defined for HAL MP). But, currently, as we are building using HAL library > > for reducing code redudancy, this halinit.c file is only built ONCE. So, > > build targets aren't taken into account (MP, ACPI). > Does ACPI have a compile time macro, like CONFIG_ACPI? Yes.
> > So, two choices, or we break that model, and forget about lib, and just > > keep base .rbuild (hal.rbuild, halacpi.rbuild, and so forth) with all files > > defined in those. > That would increase build time. Well, HAL isn't that big. It would more certainly break maintainability. > > Or with find something smarter better such as rebuilding the lib with the > > new flags for each build? > That kindof defeats the purpose of the libs, doesn't it? Most probably, yes. But, one thing is sure, having an absolute generic lib sounds impossible. For the rest, I had an other idea, to complete the changes you talked about: getting the HAL entry point out of the libs. Regards, P. Schweitzer _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
