svn commit: r201815 - head

[Bjoern A. Zeeb]

On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, M. Warner Losh wrote:

> In message: <20100110.001429.173527971.nyan at FreeBSD.org>
>            TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro <nyan at freebsd.org> writes:
> : In article <201001081901.o08J1pjc062909 at svn.freebsd.org>
> : "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz at FreeBSD.org> writes:
> :
> : >   To avoid hardcoding further kernel configuration names for
> : >   make universe, split the logic into two parts:
> : >   - 1st to build worlds and generate kernel configs like LINT.
> : >   - 2nd to build kernels for a given TARGET architecture correctly
> : >     finding all newly generated configs, not knowing anything about
> : >     LINT anymore. (*)
> :
> : > +universe_kernels: universe_kernconfs
> : > +BUILD_ARCH!=	uname -p
> :
> : Should this be "uname -m"?
> :
> :
> : > +TARGET?=	${BUILD_ARCH}
> : > +KERNCONFS!=	cd ${.CURDIR}/sys/${TARGET}/conf && \
> : > +		find [A-Z0-9]*[A-Z0-9] -type f -maxdepth 0 \
> : > +		! -name DEFAULTS ! -name NOTES
>
> Yes.  Also, the name BUILD_ARCH is misleading, since it corresponds to
> MACHINE, not to MACHINE_ARCH.  it is clear that it is used in the
> MACHINE context, not the MACHINE_ARCH context.
>
> These two are often confused, but many of the embedded platforms have
> added to the confusion and it is unclear where the sharp dividing line
> should be here anymore.  It used to be separate boot environment, but
> even that has gotten fuzzy for architectures like mips and arm that
> boot with a huge variety of boot loaders...

I guess the intial problem I had it from was introduced in r54311 to
Makefile.inc1, which nowadays reads like:

BUILD_ARCH!=    uname -p


So, the suggested correction would be:

MACHINE!=	uname -m

I wonder if I should use XMACHINE but that usually means
"cross"(building).  I could use _MACHINE!=  to not confuse it with
MACHINE from Makefile.inc1?

/bz

-- 
Bjoern A. Zeeb         It will not break if you know what you are doing.