From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752013Ab2CaStL (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Mar 2012 14:49:11 -0400 Received: from smtp.snhosting.dk ([87.238.248.203]:35547 "EHLO smtp.domainteam.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751732Ab2CaStJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Mar 2012 14:49:09 -0400 Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 20:49:06 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Borislav Petkov , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Michal Marek , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] tools: Add a toplevel Makefile Message-ID: <20120331184906.GA25809@merkur.ravnborg.org> References: <1333023957-22746-1-git-send-email-bp@amd64.org> <20120330052605.GA30508@merkur.ravnborg.org> <20120330161526.GE30876@aftab> <20120331084908.GA14149@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120331084908.GA14149@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > One question. Instead of: > > make tools/perf_install > > Couldnt we beat kbuild into submission to allow the much more > obvious: > > make tools/perf install > > ? It is more obvious if you look at it alone. But when you look at it with the other commands then you suddenly end up confused when you need to specify the command as a separate target "tools/perf install - and when it is just one target "tools/perf_install". > > I don't think anyone would expect the *kernel* to be installed > in such a circumstance - so it's only a question of making the > Makefile understand it, right? Make will try to update the two targets "tools/perf" and "install" in parallel. And it does not look easy to teach make that when you specify the target "tools/*" then the install target should just be ignored and passed down to the sub-make. Anything that adds more complexity to the top-level Makefile should be avoided if at all possible. It is un-maintainable as-is. And the consistency issue is also important. I know that if I do "make install" the kernel will be installed. So one could argue that the same should apply to the targets below tools/. But then this should be for all targets and not just install. If someone come up with a clean way to do so it is fine. but the original proposal with "tinstall" just do not cut it. Sam