Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 18:19:38 +0100
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xfs: Makefile-linux-2.6 => Makefile?
Message-ID: <20060109171938.GA19283@mars.ravnborg.org>
References: <20060109164214.GA10367@mars.ravnborg.org> <20060109164611.GA1382@infradead.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20060109164611.GA1382@infradead.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1317
Lines: 35

On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 04:46:11PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 05:42:14PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > Hi hch.
> > 
> > Any specific reason why xfs uses a indirection for the Makefile?
> > It is planned to drop export of VERSION, PATCHLEVEL etc. from
> > main makefile and it is OK except for xfs due to the funny
> > Makefile indirection.
> > 
> > I suggest:
> > git mv fs/xfs/Makefile-linux-2.6 fs/xfs/Makefile
> 
> I'd be all for it, but the SGI people like this layout to keep a common
> fs/xfs for both 2.4 and 2.6 (with linux-2.4 and linux-2.6 subdirs respectively)
> 
I have the following in my tree right now to make it compile.
But it looks pointless to me. All other submitters are asked to keep
backward compatibility cruft out of kernel proper - the same should
hold for xfs.

	Sam

diff --git a/fs/xfs/Makefile b/fs/xfs/Makefile
index 49e3e7e..0630339 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/Makefile
+++ b/fs/xfs/Makefile
@@ -1 +1 @@
-include $(TOPDIR)/fs/xfs/Makefile-linux-$(VERSION).$(PATCHLEVEL)
+include $(srctree)/fs/xfs/Makefile-linux-2.6

-
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/