[uClibc]Re: New uClibc Configuration System

[Erik Andersen]

On Tue Nov 05, 2002 at 05:06:49PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> BTW, do the names of the config options follow any consistent naming
> scheme?  There seem to be a bewildering variety of them, e.g.,
> UCLIBC_... HAVE_/HAS_... DO... ARCH_.... <no prefix>...
> 
> My quick guess is UCLIBC_... is for stuff that gets defined in
> bits/uClibc_config.h, DO... is somehow for makefile stuff,
> ARCH_... seems to be for internal communication from the arch-specific
> config file to the generic one(?), <no prefix> stuff is just random (I
> guess mostly for makefiles).

Nope.  It is currently without structure, style, or even
forethought.  If you have suggestions for a sane consistent
naming scheme, I'm quite open to making such changes...

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen             http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--