Re: [PATCH] Support SPARSE in Makefile, better SPARSE_FLAGS
- From
- Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
- Date
- Sep 30, 2005, 13:41 UTC
- Message-ID
- <1128087662.14543.14.camel@dv>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vek779kg0.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 22:46 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> writes: > > > +# explicitly what architecture to check for. > > +SPARSE = sparse > > +SPARSE_FLAGS = -D__$(shell uname -i)__ > > : siamese; uname --version > uname (coreutils) 5.2.1 > Written by David MacKenzie.
Apparently my uname 5.2.1 was heavily patched by Fedora. Note that "uname -m" is not good enough, as it would give us i686 when i386 is really needed.
Show 9 quoted lines
> Copyright (C) 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. > There is NO > warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A > PARTICULAR PURPOSE. > : siamese; uname -i > Try `uname --help' for more information. > > Better alternatives?
I hate to say that, but a better alternative is to fix sparse to act like the native compiler by default (possibly with options to imitate other architectures or to be fully arch-neutral).
I have some hacks in mind, but I don't really like them:
Not good for i686 with unpatched uname: SPARSE_FLAGS = __$(shell uname -i 2>/dev/null || uname -m)__
gcc specific: SPARSE_FLAGS = __$(shell $CC -dumpmachine | sed 's/-.*//')__
bash specific: SPARSE_FLAGS = __$(shell echo $$HOSTTYPE)__
In any case, having SPARSE variable would be convenient.
-- Regards, Pavel Roskin