search for: my_path_for_this_arch_typ

Ady asked: > Have you read the "See also" section(s) of the wiki page(s)? Yes. > By reading the relevant wiki pages, a user should (_hopefully_) get to > the conclusion that the PATH directive is relevant for c32 modules, and > not a replacement for the CONFIG / INCLUDE directives nor for relative > paths based on the "Working Directory". There's nothing

...early explain how PATH works. Thank you. > Regarding hypothetical alternatives to the PATH directive, [...] > I would had suggested different directives, one per platform > (i.e. one per firmware's architecture), something in the _form_ of: > "NEWPATH<arch_type> <my_path_for_this_arch_type>" This is a very sensible suggestion! Regarding the name, simply PATH<arch_type> should work. As you point out, with such a directive available, we wouldn't need separate architecture-specific starting configs that use INCLUDE to pull in the rest; we could just have a single...