Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262687AbTI1Tmc (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Sep 2003 15:42:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262694AbTI1Tmb (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Sep 2003 15:42:31 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([212.18.232.186]:26640 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262687AbTI1Tma (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Sep 2003 15:42:30 -0400 Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 20:42:24 +0100 From: Russell King To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn_Engel?= Cc: Linus Torvalds , Geert Uytterhoeven , Bernardo Innocenti , Kernel Mailing List , Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.0-test6 Message-ID: <20030928204224.G1428@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mail-Followup-To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn_Engel?= , Linus Torvalds , Geert Uytterhoeven , Bernardo Innocenti , Kernel Mailing List , Sam Ravnborg References: <20030928184642.GA1681@mars.ravnborg.org> <20030928191622.GA16921@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20030928191622.GA16921@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>; from joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de on Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 09:16:22PM +0200 X-Message-Flag: Your copy of Microsoft Outlook is vulnerable to viruses. See www.mutt.org for more details. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 09:16:22PM +0200, J?rn Engel wrote: > How about a check_headers target that roughly works like this: > > for (all header files in include/linux and include/asm) { > echo "#include <$HEADER>" > header.c > make header.o > rm header.c header.o > } > > Did a quick test for linux/fs.h in -test5 and it compiled fine, but > broke after removing some random #include. > > Another thing, Sam, "make header.o" causes make to call itself > indefinitely. Had to "make somedir/header.o". Not sure if you > consider this to be a bug, your decision. I have a bad feeling about this, so I'll make the following comments up front before all the reports start rolling in. It may be a good idea to document this somewhere. (Coding style?) If a header has something like these: struct my_headers_struct { struct task_struct *tsk; }; void my_function(struct task_struct *tsk); and gcc warns that "struct task_struct" has not been declared, please don't think about adding another header. Just declare the structure in the header file which needs it like this: struct task_struct; and that will prevent the #include maze of 2.4, which resulted in everything being rebuilt just because one header file was touched. -- Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/ Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/ 2.6 Serial core - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/