On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 12:26:36PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote: > On Tuesday 04 October 2005 01:38, Al Viro wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 08:30:23PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote: > > > The second is that, even if x86_64 uses things such as (from > > > arch/x86_64/mm/Makefile): > > > > > > Err... Kbuild won't know what to do with your subarch-y. The way it works > > is simple - we are saying that e.g. bitops.o is a multi-part object with > > only one part, namely ../../i386/lib/bitops.o. Said part is built by the > > normal Kbuild logics and then we get (dummy) linking, creating bitops.o. > > I know about kbuild, I just forgot to mention adding: > > obj-y += subarch.o > > (which you add below). > > I've been cleaning up the UML Makefiles for almost a year, when I was even > more of a kernel newbie than I am now ;-)...
Speaking of cleaning these makefiles: in my tree Makefile.unmap is simply extra-$(CONFIG_MODE_TT) += unmap.o $(obj)/unmap.o: _c_flags = $(call unprofile,$(CFLAGS)) now. At which point it's about to disappear - no sense to bother with including two lines, especially since one of them folds into $(obj)/stub_segv.o $(obj)/unmap.o: _c_flags = $(call unprofile,$(CFLAGS)) Post-2.6.14 fodder, obviously. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
