Messages in this thread |  | | From | Keith Owens <> | Subject | Re: test10-pre7 | Date | Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:03:30 +1100 |
| |
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:47:59 -0800 (PST), Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> wrote: >On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Keith Owens wrote: >We should have some REALLY simple and to-the-point rules. Namely: > > - object files get linked in the order specified > >No ifs, buts, "except when the user doesn't care", or anything like that. >No extra new logic with fancy new names for FIRST and LAST objects. No, >that's the wrong thing.
It is the right thing because it self documents which objects really need a link order and why. The existing mechanism has demonstrably failed to do this, resulting in fragile and error prone makefiles.
>The two things are entirely orthogonal, as far as I can see. Except >historically we've mixed them up (OX_OBJS + O_OBJS is the link-list, >O_OBJS is the symtab information). And this mixup is what the problems >come from.
True, which is one of the reasons that kbuild 2.5 will remove OX_OBJS, MX_OBJS and MIX_OBJS. But that change affects all Makefiles, we are supposed to be in a code freeze. My patch fixes usb and only affects usb, not the entire kernel.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |