Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Sam Ravnborg
Hi Kai - long time.. > > The SCCS rules is the sole reason why -rR has not been enabled. > > An easy way to make sure that the SCCS business is not a factor would be > to explicitly put the SCCS rules into the Makefile -- it's just two lines. Yup, I will do that when 2.6.11 opens up. If other

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 08:20:27PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > In my inbox I have a patch that enables SCCS support for all files. > Today it fails for Kconfig files at least. I guess the kconfig system needs to try to make Kconfig files before including them ... this works for me, checking a

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread J.A. Magallon
On 2005.02.08, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 01:23:48PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: > > Enabling the following in the Makefile should have the same effect: > > > > # For maximum performance (+ possibly random breakage, uncomment > > # the following) > > > > #MAKEFLAGS += -rR >

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Kai Germaschewski
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > The SCCS rules is the sole reason why -rR has not been enabled. An easy way to make sure that the SCCS business is not a factor would be to explicitly put the SCCS rules into the Makefile -- it's just two lines. This way one could easily make sure

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Sam Ravnborg
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 03:44:17PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 01:23:48PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: > > Enabling the following in the Makefile should have the same effect: > > > > # For maximum performance (+ possibly random breakage, uncomment > > # the following) > >

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Ryan Anderson
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 03:44:17PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 01:23:48PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: > > Enabling the following in the Makefile should have the same effect: > > > > # For maximum performance (+ possibly random breakage, uncomment > > # the following) > >

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 01:23:48PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: > Enabling the following in the Makefile should have the same effect: > > # For maximum performance (+ possibly random breakage, uncomment > # the following) > > #MAKEFLAGS += -rR This reduces the debug output even further (and size

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Roman Zippel
Hi, On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > David Holland pointed out that Make has a lot of implicit suffix rules > built in and you can disable them by setting ".SUFFIXES:". As an > example, checking the debugging information shows we no longer try to > compile anything from a '.f'

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Roman Zippel
Hi, On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Matthew Wilcox wrote: David Holland pointed out that Make has a lot of implicit suffix rules built in and you can disable them by setting .SUFFIXES:. As an example, checking the debugging information shows we no longer try to compile anything from a '.f' suffix.

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 01:23:48PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: Enabling the following in the Makefile should have the same effect: # For maximum performance (+ possibly random breakage, uncomment # the following) #MAKEFLAGS += -rR This reduces the debug output even further (and size of

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Ryan Anderson
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 03:44:17PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote: On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 01:23:48PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: Enabling the following in the Makefile should have the same effect: # For maximum performance (+ possibly random breakage, uncomment # the following)

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Sam Ravnborg
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 03:44:17PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote: On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 01:23:48PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: Enabling the following in the Makefile should have the same effect: # For maximum performance (+ possibly random breakage, uncomment # the following)

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Kai Germaschewski
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Sam Ravnborg wrote: The SCCS rules is the sole reason why -rR has not been enabled. An easy way to make sure that the SCCS business is not a factor would be to explicitly put the SCCS rules into the Makefile -- it's just two lines. This way one could easily make sure there

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread J.A. Magallon
On 2005.02.08, Matthew Wilcox wrote: On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 01:23:48PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: Enabling the following in the Makefile should have the same effect: # For maximum performance (+ possibly random breakage, uncomment # the following) #MAKEFLAGS += -rR aic7xxx

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 08:20:27PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: In my inbox I have a patch that enables SCCS support for all files. Today it fails for Kconfig files at least. I guess the kconfig system needs to try to make Kconfig files before including them ... this works for me, checking a

Re: [PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-08 Thread Sam Ravnborg
Hi Kai - long time.. The SCCS rules is the sole reason why -rR has not been enabled. An easy way to make sure that the SCCS business is not a factor would be to explicitly put the SCCS rules into the Makefile -- it's just two lines. Yup, I will do that when 2.6.11 opens up. If other rules

[PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-07 Thread Matthew Wilcox
David Holland pointed out that Make has a lot of implicit suffix rules built in and you can disable them by setting ".SUFFIXES:". As an example, checking the debugging information shows we no longer try to compile anything from a '.f' suffix. This turns out to be good for a 15% speedup on a

[PATCH] Makefiles are not built using a Fortran compiler

2005-02-07 Thread Matthew Wilcox
David Holland pointed out that Make has a lot of implicit suffix rules built in and you can disable them by setting .SUFFIXES:. As an example, checking the debugging information shows we no longer try to compile anything from a '.f' suffix. This turns out to be good for a 15% speedup on a build