On 17.11.2025 13:48, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 17.11.25 13:29, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 14.11.2025 12:32, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> --- a/Config.mk
>>> +++ b/Config.mk
>>> @@ -159,6 +159,19 @@ define move-if-changed
>>> if ! cmp -s $(1) $(2); then mv -f $(1) $(2); else rm -f $(1); fi
>>> endef
>>>
>>> +PATH_FILES := Paths
>>> +INC_FILES := $(foreach f, $(PATH_FILES), $(XEN_ROOT)/config/$(f).mk)
>>> +
>>> +include $(INC_FILES)
>>
>> Is any of the above part of introducing the macro? "Paths" is already a
>> specific case of holding patterns that want replacing. In turn ...
>>
>>> +BUILD_MAKE_VARS := $(foreach f, $(PATH_FILES), $(shell awk '$$2 == ":=" {
>>> print $$1; }' $(XEN_ROOT)/config/$(f).mk.in))
>>
>> ... it's not quite clear to me how it can be $(PATH_FILES) here.
>
> See patch 4.
>
> PATH_FILES is specifying the .mk files containing the marker definitions.
> I need the ability to have multiple such files in order to be able to let
> tools/configure build its own definitions.
That's a good example - why would that affect the stubdom/ part of the tree?
Imo what pattern file(s) to use wants leaving to the invokee of the macro,
not pinning down globally for everyone.
Jan
