Hi,
This patch adds a Makefile for building 'testusb'.
I am wondering if it should really still use usbdevfs (deprecated), instead of usbfs?
Thanks,
Davidlohr
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <[email protected]>
---
tools/usb/Makefile | 14 ++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/usb/Makefile
diff --git a/tools/usb/Makefile b/tools/usb/Makefile
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..45b5cab
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/usb/Makefile
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+# Makefile for building 'usbtest'
+
+CC = $(CROSS_COMPILE)gcc
+PTHREAD_LIBS = -lpthread
+WARNINGS = -Wall
+WARNINGS := $(WARNINGS) -Wextra
+CFLAGS = $(WARNINGS) -g $(PTHREAD_LIBS)
+
+all:
+ $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -o testusb testusb.c
+
+clean:
+ $(RM) testusb
+
--
1.7.0.4
You should Cc it to [email protected] as well.
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 11:50:42 +0200, Davidlohr Bueso <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch adds a Makefile for building 'testusb'.
>
> I am wondering if it should really still use usbdevfs (deprecated),
> instead of usbfs?
Patches welcome... ;) Personally I dunno, I just took David's code
and changes it a bit.
> Thanks,
> Davidlohr
>
> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <[email protected]>
I'd say the above is not acceptable as a commit message. Please
include only the text that is intended to go to the commit message
above. All additional comments may go under the “---” marker.
> ---
> tools/usb/Makefile | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 tools/usb/Makefile
>
> diff --git a/tools/usb/Makefile b/tools/usb/Makefile
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..45b5cab
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/usb/Makefile
> @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> +# Makefile for building 'usbtest'
> +
> +CC = $(CROSS_COMPILE)gcc
> +PTHREAD_LIBS = -lpthread
> +WARNINGS = -Wall
> +WARNINGS := $(WARNINGS) -Wextra
Is it necessary? Wouldn't plain
WARNINGS = -Wall -Wextra
suffice? I am aware “=” can be overridden by command line and
“:=” cannot but I'd use single line anyway.
> +CFLAGS = $(WARNINGS) -g $(PTHREAD_LIBS)
> +
> +all:
> + $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -o testusb testusb.c
IMO, you should also include a rule for ffs-test, ie:
+all: testusb ffs-test
+
+%: %.c
+ $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -o $@ $^
Not tested.
> +
> +clean:
> + $(RM) testusb
Instead:
> + $(RM) testusb ffs-test
> +
Unnecessary empty line at EOF.
Other then that, I see no reason why not to include it.
--
Best regards, _ _
| Humble Liege of Serenely Enlightened Majesty of o' \,=./ `o
| Computer Science, Michał "mina86" Nazarewicz (o o)
+----[mina86*mina86.com]---[mina86*jabber.org]----ooO--(_)--Ooo--
On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 13:29 +0200, Michał Nazarewicz wrote:
> You should Cc it to [email protected] as well.
>
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 11:50:42 +0200, Davidlohr Bueso <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This patch adds a Makefile for building 'testusb'.
> >
> > I am wondering if it should really still use usbdevfs (deprecated),
> > instead of usbfs?
>
> Patches welcome... ;) Personally I dunno, I just took David's code
> and changes it a bit.
>
I am modifying this a bit, will send patch when ready.
> > Thanks,
> > Davidlohr
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <[email protected]>
>
> I'd say the above is not acceptable as a commit message. Please
> include only the text that is intended to go to the commit message
> above. All additional comments may go under the “---” marker.
>
> > ---
> > tools/usb/Makefile | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 tools/usb/Makefile
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/usb/Makefile b/tools/usb/Makefile
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..45b5cab
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tools/usb/Makefile
> > @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> > +# Makefile for building 'usbtest'
> > +
> > +CC = $(CROSS_COMPILE)gcc
> > +PTHREAD_LIBS = -lpthread
> > +WARNINGS = -Wall
> > +WARNINGS := $(WARNINGS) -Wextra
>
> Is it necessary? Wouldn't plain
>
> WARNINGS = -Wall -Wextra
>
> suffice? I am aware “=” can be overridden by command line and
> “:=” cannot but I'd use single line anyway.
>
> > +CFLAGS = $(WARNINGS) -g $(PTHREAD_LIBS)
> > +
> > +all:
> > + $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -o testusb testusb.c
>
> IMO, you should also include a rule for ffs-test, ie:
>
> +all: testusb ffs-test
> +
> +%: %.c
> + $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -o $@ $^
>
> Not tested.
>
> > +
> > +clean:
> > + $(RM) testusb
>
> Instead:
>
> > + $(RM) testusb ffs-test
>
> > +
>
> Unnecessary empty line at EOF.
>
> Other then that, I see no reason why not to include it.
>
Sorry for the delay, I will redo the patch with the suggestions and
resend.
Thanks,
Davidlohr