Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 1 Apr 2012 10:42:53 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] tools: Add a toplevel Makefile |
| |
* Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote:
> > > > One question. Instead of: > > > > make tools/perf_install > > > > Couldnt we beat kbuild into submission to allow the much more > > obvious: > > > > make tools/perf install > > > > ? > It is more obvious if you look at it alone. > But when you look at it with the other commands then you suddenly > end up confused when you need to specify the command as a > separate target "tools/perf install - and when it is just > one target "tools/perf_install". > > > > > I don't think anyone would expect the *kernel* to be installed > > in such a circumstance - so it's only a question of making the > > Makefile understand it, right? > Make will try to update the two targets "tools/perf" and "install" > in parallel. And it does not look easy to teach make that when you > specify the target "tools/*" then the install target should just > be ignored and passed down to the sub-make. > > Anything that adds more complexity to the top-level Makefile should > be avoided if at all possible. It is un-maintainable as-is. > And the consistency issue is also important. > > I know that if I do "make install" the kernel will be installed. > So one could argue that the same should apply to > the targets below tools/. > But then this should be for all targets and not just install. > If someone come up with a clean way to do so it is fine. > but the original proposal with "tinstall" just do not cut it.
'tinstall' is definitely out, no argument about that.
Viable options are:
tools/perf install tools/perf_install tools/perf-install
I'm fine with either one.
Thanks,
Ingo
| |