This is the easiest patch.. :) Add a top level 'lar' target to v3, so I can build the utility by itself. Until LAR gets seperated out into its own repository, I'm going to have to figure out a way to make buildROM build lar independently of the rest of the v3 code, and this is probably the best way.
Jordan
[PATCH][LAR] Add a top level target for LAR
Add a top level target to the LAR makefile so it can be built by itself in the LBv3 tree.
Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse jordan.crouse@amd.com Index: LinuxBIOSv3/util/lar/Makefile =================================================================== --- LinuxBIOSv3.orig/util/lar/Makefile 2007-07-09 11:47:18.000000000 -0600 +++ LinuxBIOSv3/util/lar/Makefile 2007-07-09 11:47:33.000000000 -0600 @@ -47,6 +47,8 @@ $(Q)$(HOSTCC) $(HOSTCFLAGS) -c $< -o $@
+lar: $(obj)/util/lar/lar + # ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- # Stuff below this line is for debugging purposes only.
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:07:47PM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
Until LAR gets seperated out into its own repository, I'm going to have to figure out a way to make buildROM build lar independently of the rest of the v3 code, and this is probably the best way.
Sorry, I disagree. :)
I would expect lar to be a target in util/
//Peter
On 7/11/07, Peter Stuge peter@stuge.se wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:07:47PM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
Until LAR gets seperated out into its own repository, I'm going to have to figure out a way to make buildROM build lar independently of the rest of the v3 code, and this is probably the best way.
Sorry, I disagree. :)
I would expect lar to be a target in util/
As Jordan says: "Please keep in mind that these are not set in stone - I expect heavy criticism and thought about whats gong on here, and I know you won't let me down. :)"
Well, *that* didn't take too long :-)
ron
On 11/07/07 20:12 +0200, Peter Stuge wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:07:47PM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
Until LAR gets seperated out into its own repository, I'm going to have to figure out a way to make buildROM build lar independently of the rest of the v3 code, and this is probably the best way.
Sorry, I disagree. :)
I would expect lar to be a target in util/
I agree. But as its written right now, the makefiles depend on the rules in the toplevel directory - so no matter where we define the target, it can only be called from the toplevel.
Now, if we moved the rules to a seperate rules file, and included _that_ from util/, then I'm with you... :)
Jordan
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:30:09PM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
I would expect lar to be a target in util/
I agree. But as its written right now, the makefiles depend on the rules in the toplevel directory
Ah. I see.
This is another reason to move util/ out to it's own home.
What was decided? I'm not religious about a separate repo but I do think it's appropriate since it's not really a part of LB.
//Peter
Peter Stuge wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:30:09PM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
I would expect lar to be a target in util/
I agree. But as its written right now, the makefiles depend on the rules in the toplevel directory
Ah. I see.
This is another reason to move util/ out to it's own home.
What was decided? I'm not religious about a separate repo but I do think it's appropriate since it's not really a part of LB.
And since you are using svn, wouldn't it be fairly trivial to patch it in as a svn:externals?
* Peter Stuge peter@stuge.se [070712 01:08]:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:30:09PM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
I would expect lar to be a target in util/
I agree. But as its written right now, the makefiles depend on the rules in the toplevel directory
Ah. I see.
This is another reason to move util/ out to it's own home.
Please: Whoever moves lar to it's own repository: Make sure that it builds cleanly in v3 and out of v3 before doing so. Just moving it out to another repo without making it compilable outside makes no sense. Breaking the way it is built (out of the tree!) makes no sense either.
The same applies for flashrom.
BTW: We should really get lxbios.sf.net into the tree. That's far more important than fixing something that is not broken.
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 12:21:38PM +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
This is another reason to move util/ out to it's own home.
Please: Whoever moves lar to it's own repository: Make sure that it builds cleanly in v3 and out of v3 before doing so.
Good point. I can't even get it to build in v3:
LinuxBIOSv3 $ make util/lar/lar gcc -Wall -g -I/home/stuge/lb/LinuxBIOSv3 -Iinclude -I/home/stuge/lb/LinuxBIOSv3/include -I/home/stuge/lb/LinuxBIOSv3/include/arch/x86/ -include /home/stuge/lb/LinuxBIOSv3/build/config.h -include /home/stuge/lb/LinuxBIOSv3/build/build.h util/lar/lar.c -o util/lar/lar In file included from include/string.h:24, from util/lar/lar.c:23: /home/stuge/lb/LinuxBIOSv3/include/arch/x86/types.h:18: error: conflicting types for 'size_t' /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/include/stddef.h:214: error: previous declaration of 'size_t' was here In file included from util/lar/lar.c:34: util/lar/lar.h:58: error: redefinition of typedef 'u32' /home/stuge/lb/LinuxBIOSv3/include/arch/x86/types.h:9: error: previous declaration of 'u32' was here util/lar/lar.c: In function 'main': util/lar/lar.c:99: warning: implicit declaration of function 'strcasecmp' util/lar/lar.c:116: warning: implicit declaration of function 'strdup' util/lar/lar.c:116: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function 'strdup' util/lar/lar.c:140: warning: implicit declaration of function 'strncmp' make: *** [util/lar/lar] Error 1
Help?
Just moving it out to another repo without making it compilable outside makes no sense. Breaking the way it is built (out of the tree!) makes no sense either.
The same applies for flashrom.
I agree. What I actually am after is the same as Jordan - I want to be able to build lar completely independently of v3.
Ie. checkout just v3/util/lar and go.
It does make sense to keep lar in the v3 repo until the point where it is actually used in multiple versions of LB.
BTW: We should really get lxbios.sf.net into the tree. That's far more important than fixing something that is not broken.
Agree! Is it possible to download the complete repo files from SF to run cvs2svn on or will we lose history?
//Peter
* Peter Stuge peter@stuge.se [070712 17:59]:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 12:21:38PM +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
This is another reason to move util/ out to it's own home.
Please: Whoever moves lar to it's own repository: Make sure that it builds cleanly in v3 and out of v3 before doing so.
Good point. I can't even get it to build in v3:
LinuxBIOSv3 $ make util/lar/lar
make build/util/lar/lar ?
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 06:22:30PM +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
Good point. I can't even get it to build in v3:
LinuxBIOSv3 $ make util/lar/lar
make build/util/lar/lar ?
Oh a build dir in v3 too? Didn't get that. (I admit, I haven't built that much.)
$ make .. DONE $ make build/util/lar/lar make: `build/util/lar/lar' is up to date. $ make clean CLEAN build CLEAN doxygen CLEAN doc/design/newboot.pdf $ make build/util/lar/lar make: *** No rule to make target `build/util/lar/lar'. Stop. $
Must there be an extra step to set up the build directory? I just want to run make and get a binary. Too naive? :)
//Peter
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 05:59:07PM +0200, Peter Stuge wrote:
It does make sense to keep lar in the v3 repo until the point where it is actually used in multiple versions of LB.
Sorry. I realize I've gone completely back and forth on this. It's because I'm too used to cvs and not being able to check out just a subdir in a repo.
Will get with the program.
//Peter
* Jordan Crouse jordan.crouse@amd.com [070711 20:07]:
This is the easiest patch.. :) Add a top level 'lar' target to v3, so I can build the utility by itself. Until LAR gets seperated out into its own repository, I'm going to have to figure out a way to make buildROM build lar independently of the rest of the v3 code, and this is probably the best way.
Not sure I get this right. What's the purpose? Don't you build linuxbios, too?
Stefan
On 12/07/07 12:18 +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
- Jordan Crouse jordan.crouse@amd.com [070711 20:07]:
This is the easiest patch.. :) Add a top level 'lar' target to v3, so I can build the utility by itself. Until LAR gets seperated out into its own repository, I'm going to have to figure out a way to make buildROM build lar independently of the rest of the v3 code, and this is probably the best way.
Not sure I get this right. What's the purpose? Don't you build linuxbios, too?
Yes - but I would like to build LAR seperately, if I can. buildROM works better when the pieces are more modular, and I can pick and choose what I need to build.
Jordan
* Jordan Crouse jordan.crouse@amd.com [070711 20:07]:
This is the easiest patch.. :) Add a top level 'lar' target to v3, so I can build the utility by itself. Until LAR gets seperated out into its own repository, I'm going to have to figure out a way to make buildROM build lar independently of the rest of the v3 code, and this is probably the best way.
Jordan
[PATCH][LAR] Add a top level target for LAR
Add a top level target to the LAR makefile so it can be built by itself in the LBv3 tree.
Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse jordan.crouse@amd.com
Not exectly sugar of elegance, but I think this works for us.
Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer stepan@coresystems.de
Index: LinuxBIOSv3/util/lar/Makefile
--- LinuxBIOSv3.orig/util/lar/Makefile 2007-07-09 11:47:18.000000000 -0600 +++ LinuxBIOSv3/util/lar/Makefile 2007-07-09 11:47:33.000000000 -0600 @@ -47,6 +47,8 @@ $(Q)$(HOSTCC) $(HOSTCFLAGS) -c $< -o $@
+lar: $(obj)/util/lar/lar
# ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- # Stuff below this line is for debugging purposes only.
-- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
-
Jordan Crouse -
Nathanael D. Noblet -
Peter Stuge -
ron minnich -
Stefan Reinauer