On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Peter Stuge peter@stuge.se wrote:
Marc Jones wrote:
As for the build things, can we not get around stuffing all of that into each payload?
What do you mean? It seems to me that we want each payload responsible for building its own version of libpayload.
I hadn't thought of that! Do we? Interesting.
In a way it makes sense because different payloads need different parts of libpayload. But thinking of it as a replacement for glibc or at least crt0 then it isn't so nice to have more than one. This is how I've always thought of it until now.
But ok, say we want local libpayload per payload, then I think we should still try to simplify things.
Maybe provide a payload.inc Makefile stub in libpayload which the payload Makefile simply includes after setting a variable name or two?
That's a different patch(set) though. :)
Acked-by: Peter Stuge peter@stuge.se
//Peter
Thanks Myles and Peter.
r5816
Updating the wiki now.
Marc