Skip to contentSkip to conversation

MAKEALL patch

U-Boot-Users Michal Simek 3 participants 6 messages Aug 5, 2007 – Aug 6, 2007

lore
Share & tools
lore

Michal Simek

author
#0 lore raw

Corection MAKEALL script.

Signed of by: Michal Simek <[email protected]>

MAKEALL +1 -1
index 127faa8..2b44244 100755
@@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ build_target() {
  ${MAKE} ${JOBS} all 2>&1 >${LOG_DIR}/$target.MAKELOG \
     | tee ${LOG_DIR}/$target.ERR
 
- ${CROSS_COMPILE:-ppc_8xx-}size ${BUILD_DIR}/u-boot \
+ ${CROSS_COMPILE}size ${BUILD_DIR}/u-boot \
     | tee -a ${LOG_DIR}/$target.MAKELOG
 }
#1 lore raw
Quoted 10 lines · In message <006f01c7d762$3976ead0$0500a8c0@monstrone> you wrote:

Corection MAKEALL script.

Signed of by: Michal Simek <[email protected]>

MAKEALL +0 -0
index 127faa8..2b44244 100755

MAKEALL build_target() { · line 353

Quoted 7 lines
MAKEALL +1 -1
@@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ build_target() {
  ${MAKE} ${JOBS} all 2>&1 >${LOG_DIR}/$target.MAKELOG \
     | tee ${LOG_DIR}/$target.ERR
 
- ${CROSS_COMPILE:-ppc_8xx-}size ${BUILD_DIR}/u-boot \
+ ${CROSS_COMPILE}size ${BUILD_DIR}/u-boot \
     | tee -a ${LOG_DIR}/$target.MAKELOG
 }

What is the specific bug you intend to fix here? Using ppc_8xx-size in case CROSS_COMPILE is not set is not worse than using the native "size" command, it seems. Actually, given the fact that the majority supported of boards are PowerPC, it is right in most cases.

So why do you think it should be changed?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

Signature · 4 lines
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
author
#2 lore raw

Hi Wolfgang,

Quoted 6 lines

What is the specific bug you intend to fix here? Using ppc_8xx-size in case CROSS_COMPILE is not set is not worse than using the native "size" command, it seems. Actually, given the fact that the majority supported of boards are PowerPC, it is right in most cases.

So why do you think it should be changed?

I think size utility do the same function as ppc_8xx-size. I tried 4 cross tools and the result is the same. (Logs are below) And in man page you can find: "size can automatically recognize many formats" in --target option.

From my point of view is size utility better than error message. And I think that many developers use different cross tools than ppc_8xx-.

Best regards,
Michal Simek

microblaze at monstr u-boot-microblaze]$ ./MAKEALL xupv2p Configuring for xupv2p board...
./MAKEALL: line 351: ppc_8xx-size: command not found

[microblaze at monstr u-boot-microblaze]$ ./MAKEALL xupv2p Configuring for xupv2p board...
text data bss dec hex filename
89326 21479 214916 325721 4f859 ./u-boot

[microblaze at monstr u-boot-microblaze]$ size u-boot
text data bss dec hex filename
89326 21479 214916 325721 4f859 u-boot

[microblaze at monstr u-boot-microblaze]$ microblaze-uclinux-size u-boot
text data bss dec hex filename
89326 21479 214916 325721 4f859 u-boot

[microblaze at monstr u-boot-microblaze]$ powerpc-405-linux-gnu-size u-boot
text data bss dec hex filename
89326 21479 214916 325721 4f859 u-boot
[microblaze at monstr u-boot-microblaze]$

[microblaze at monstr bin]$ powerpc-linux-uclibc-size u-boot
text data bss dec hex filename
89326 21479 214916 325721 4f859 u-boot
[microblaze at monstr bin]$

#3 lore raw
Quoted 2 lines · In message <001301c7d76f$fd1d5c50$0500a8c0@monstrone> you wrote:

I think size utility do the same function as ppc_8xx-size.

It depends on the build options if it supports the target architecture or not.

Quoted 3 lines

I tried 4 cross tools and the result is the same. (Logs are below) And in man page you can find: "size can automatically recognize many formats" in --target option.

The "in --target option" is the important part here.

Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 1 line

From my point of view is size utility better than error message.

And I think that many developers use different cross tools than ppc_8xx-.

Which error message? If you set CROSS_COMPILE to any sane value for your system, or set it to the empty string, no error will be caused.

Please show which error you are trying to fix.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

Signature · 6 lines
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
I have yet to add the ESP-driver to the kernel to read  the  mind  of
the user...                                       - Linus Torvalds in
      <[email protected]>
#4 lore raw
In reply to Wolfgang Denk
Quoted 20 lines · Wolfgang Denk
Quoted 19 lines · In message <006f01c7d762$3976ead0$0500a8c0@monstrone> you wrote:

Corection MAKEALL script.

Signed of by: Michal Simek <[email protected]>

MAKEALL +1 -1
index 127faa8..2b44244 100755
@@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ build_target() {
  ${MAKE} ${JOBS} all 2>&1 >${LOG_DIR}/$target.MAKELOG \
 
     | tee ${LOG_DIR}/$target.ERR
 
- ${CROSS_COMPILE:-ppc_8xx-}size ${BUILD_DIR}/u-boot \
+ ${CROSS_COMPILE}size ${BUILD_DIR}/u-boot \
 
     | tee -a ${LOG_DIR}/$target.MAKELOG
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line

}

What is the specific bug you intend to fix here? Using ppc_8xx-size in case CROSS_COMPILE is not set is not worse than using the native "size" command, it seems. Actually, given the fact that the majority supported of boards are PowerPC, it is right in most cases.

So why do you think it should be changed?

ive posted this patch a few times but never gotten a response ...

this code is wrong because ppc_8xx-size rarely exists for people who are not doing ppc development while size almost always exists.

so while the toplevel Makefile will setup a default CROSS prefix based on the board config, the MAKEALL script does not have access to that information, so for everyone who lacks ppc_8xx-size, using the MAKEALL script yields annoying broken output by default.

consider my typical use case:
./MAKEALL blackfin
i do not have CROSS_COMPILE set in my env and this is OK because the top level Makefile sets it by default to bfin-uclinux-.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20070806/b37b08c4/attachment.pgp

author
#5 lore raw
Quoted 21 lines
Quoted 6 lines

What is the specific bug you intend to fix here? Using ppc_8xx-size in case CROSS_COMPILE is not set is not worse than using the native "size" command, it seems. Actually, given the fact that the majority supported of boards are PowerPC, it is right in most cases.

So why do you think it should be changed?

ive posted this patch a few times but never gotten a response ...

this code is wrong because ppc_8xx-size rarely exists for people who are not
doing ppc development while size almost always exists.

so while the toplevel Makefile will setup a default CROSS prefix based on the
board config, the MAKEALL script does not have access to that information, so
for everyone who lacks ppc_8xx-size, using the MAKEALL script yields annoying
broken output by default.

Quoted 6 lines

consider my typical use case:
./MAKEALL blackfin
i do not have CROSS_COMPILE set in my env and this is OK because the top level
Makefile sets it by default to bfin-uclinux-.
-mike

Thanks Mike.