Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> > So, when a vendor has to add a new driver, especially with the new-style
> > makefiles, you have a one-line patch to a makefile, a one-line patch to
> > a Config.in, and a patch which adds the driver to the tree.
> >
> > It would make adding new drivers to vendor kernel packages a whole lot
> > easier and more modular if you could add a driver simply by doing:
> >
> > cp driver.c driver.config.in driver.mak linux/extras
> >
> > ...and then the makefile and config system automatically slurps this
> > data. extras/Makefile could look something like:
> >
> > ...new style init..
> > include *.mak
> > ...new style obj-x handling...
> > include Rules.make
> >
> > Something similar would have to be worked out for Config.in.
> >
> > Of course, for anything complex, patching is still an option.
> >
> > Comments? Suggested implementation? :)
>
> Well, having .in and .mak files with single lines in them seems ugly
> to me. What about make dep scanning for
>
> /* Makefile: obj-$(CONFIG_MY_DRIVER) += mydriver.o */
> /* Config.in: bool CONFIG_MY_DRIVER */
>
> in .c files?
Don Becker has a similar solution in his newer net drivers. For
single-c-file drivers it is wholly sufficient. For anything remotely
complex, like a multi-file driver in its own directory, makefile
fragments of some sort are necessary..
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Oct 07 2000 - 21:00:21 EST