>>> On 02.12.15 at 16:41, <jonathan.creekm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:36 AM, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> On 02.12.15 at 16:29, <jonathan.creekm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/Makefile
>>> +++ b/xen/Makefile
>>> @@ -91,7 +91,8 @@ _clean: delete-unfresh-files
>>> $(MAKE) -f $(BASEDIR)/Rules.mk -C xsm clean
>>> $(MAKE) -f $(BASEDIR)/Rules.mk -C crypto clean
>>> $(MAKE) -f $(BASEDIR)/Rules.mk -C arch/$(TARGET_ARCH) clean
>>> - rm -f include/asm *.o $(TARGET) $(TARGET).gz $(TARGET).efi
>>> $(TARGET)-syms
> *~ core $(DEPS)
>>> + find . \( -name "*.o" -o -name "*.d" \) -exec rm -f {} \;
>>
>> If you really meant *.d, then *.[od] would have done. But in fact I
>> think we want to limit this to ".*.d". Which I could fix up while
>> committing, but then I'm not sure …
>
> Easy enough to change it to “.*.d”.
>
>>
>>> --- a/xen/Rules.mk
>>> +++ b/xen/Rules.mk
>>> @@ -173,7 +173,7 @@ FORCE:
>>>
>>> .PHONY: clean
>>> clean:: $(addprefix _clean_, $(subdir-all))
>>> - rm -f *.o *~ core $(DEPS)
>>> + rm -f *~ core
>>
>> ... this is a good idea, as it's not clear to me whether "clean" actually
>> works when invoked in sub-trees of xen/.
>
> I can definitely take that bit out; I just didn’t see the point in
> replicating the
> removal of the files. Note that, whether I take it out or leave it in,
> “clean” still
> will not totally work when invoked in sub-trees of xen/ because *.o is still
> not
> enough to catch all of the object files (which was the whole point of this
> patch
> in the first place).
True, but let's not make matters worse. I'd be fine leaving this
second change in only if we knew "clean" doesn't work at all when
invoked against sub-trees of xen/.
And again - no reason to re-submit, I can easily tweak the patch
upon commit, as long as you're fine with this being done with your
S-o-b in place.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
