"H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
> > In <85g0vii63p.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> lars brinkhoff (lars@nocrew.org) wrote:
> > > Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@mandrakesoft.mandrakesoft.com> writes:
> > >> On 28 Jan 2000, lars brinkhoff wrote:
> > >> > Why do I want this? Because I often build for an architecture which is
> > >> > not the native one. Saving the architecture in .arch is more convenient
> > >> > then typing "make ARCH=foo".
> > >> How tough is it to edit the makefile? :)
> > > Not tough, but I think it's easier for people to type
> > > echo FOO >.arch
> > > than to mess with the Makefile.
> > It's usually MUCH better to mess with the Makefile then to add kludges in
> > mainstream kernel. I think probability of acception is zero.
> Actually, this seems like a reasonable hack to me. However, why hide
> the file?
I did that in analogy with the .config file. Anyway, I think Gert-jan Los'
hack to put the information in .config is even better.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 31 2000 - 21:00:27 EST