Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 8 Feb 2007 02:40:28 -0500 | From | "Mike Frysinger" <> | Subject | Re: search-a-little-harder-for-mkimage.patch |
| |
On 2/8/07, Oleg Verych <olecom@flower.upol.cz> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 12:56:17AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 2/8/07, Oleg Verych <olecom@flower.upol.cz> wrote: > > >> Check to see if `${CROSS_COMPILE}mkimage` exists and if not, fall back to > > >> the standard `mkimage` > > > > > >Why this can't be done by > > > > > > PATH=$CROSS_COMPILE:$PATH > > > > > >in your environment? > > > > because it wouldnt matter ? the tool is called > > "$CROSS_COMPILE-mkimage", it isnt $CROSS_COMPILE_PATH/mkimage > > Well, i mean search for your `mkimage'. > > Let's see how all this used in Makefiles (avr32, ppc, sh are same) > > ../arch/arm/boot/Makefile: > > MKIMAGE := $(srctree)/scripts/mkuboot.sh > ... > quiet_cmd_uimage = UIMAGE $@ > cmd_uimage = $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(MKIMAGE) -A arm -O linux -T kernel \ > -C none -a $(ZRELADDR) -e $(ZRELADDR) \ > -n 'Linux-$(KERNELRELEASE)' -d $< $@ > > type, which with bash or whatever, doesn't matter. All they need *your* > toolchain in $PATH, why not just to put "$CROSS_COMPILE-mkimage" instead > of $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(MKIMAGE) here? mkuboot.sh just searches $PATH for > mkimage and run it. Double overkill, no?
by this argument, why does mkuboot.sh exist at all then ? let's simply delete mkuboot.sh and change all arch Makefile's like so: - $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(MKIMAGE) ... + -mkimage ...
i of course prefer the existing solution: call the mkuboot.sh script which checks for a few variations of the `mkimage` binary and if it does not exist, output a friendly message -mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |