On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 11:00:07AM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> Sam> Eventually - yes. But not just now. Kbuild was introduced
> Sam> because it was needed in the top-level directory and it made
> Sam> good sense to do so. But for now keeping Makefile is a good
> Sam> choice. This is anyway what people are used to.
>
> OK, disregard my suggestion then. Should we patch
> Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt to correct the current
> documentation, which says:
>
> The preferred name for the kbuild files is 'Kbuild' but 'Makefile'
> will continue to be supported. All new developmen is expected to use
> the Kbuild filename.
I've just checked in the following patch:
diff --git a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt
index 99d51a5..a9c00fa 100644
--- a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt
+++ b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt
@@ -106,9 +106,9 @@ This document is aimed towards normal de
Most Makefiles within the kernel are kbuild Makefiles that use the
kbuild infrastructure. This chapter introduce the syntax used in the
kbuild makefiles.
-The preferred name for the kbuild files is 'Kbuild' but 'Makefile' will
-continue to be supported. All new developmen is expected to use the
-Kbuild filename.
+The preferred name for the kbuild files are 'Makefile' but 'Kbuild' can
+be used and if both a 'Makefile' and a 'Kbuild' file exists then the 'Kbuild'
+file will be used.
Section 3.1 "Goal definitions" is a quick intro, further chapters provide
more details, with real examples.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
