Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 14:14:23 -0700 From: John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com> To: Andrew Turner <andrew@fubar.geek.nz> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Warner Losh <imp@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r266349 - in head: share/mk sys/conf Message-ID: <20140520211423.GT43976@funkthat.com> In-Reply-To: <20140518205605.70159532@bender.Home> References: <201405172031.s4HKVY51073386@svn.freebsd.org> <20140518205605.70159532@bender.Home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andrew Turner wrote this message on Sun, May 18, 2014 at 20:56 +0100: > On Sat, 17 May 2014 20:31:34 +0000 (UTC) > Warner Losh <imp@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > > Author: imp > > Date: Sat May 17 20:31:34 2014 > > New Revision: 266349 > > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/266349 > > > > Log: > > The time is not yet ripe to break the lack of dependencies between > > src/sys and the rest of the tree for builds. > > o eliminate including bsd.mkopts.mk for the moment in kern.opts.mk > > o No need to include src.opts.mk at all anymore. The reasons for it > > are now coverted in sys.mk and src.sys.mk. > > This breaks ARM kernel builds as MK_ARM_EABI is undefined, at least on > 9.x. The below patch fixes it for me. But isn't armeb's ABI OABI on 9? so defaulting this to yes would change the ABI as you build on 9.x wouldn't it? Or am I just confused by your throwing in 9.x into the mix? -- John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579 "All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140520211423.GT43976>