From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [194.106.48.114] (helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IHeO3-0003oR-5A for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Sun, 05 Aug 2007 13:35:07 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l75BWmi9018471 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 12:32:48 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 18001-10 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 12:32:45 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.1.15] (max.rpnet.com [192.168.1.15]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l75BWhWg018464 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 12:32:43 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org In-Reply-To: <1186132901.5972.314.camel@hammer.suse.cz> References: <46B1753D.1090507@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> <46B1B6DB.6020603@klever.net> <1186053831.5972.222.camel@hammer.suse.cz> <46B1C71F.2090608@klever.net> <1186058282.5972.232.camel@hammer.suse.cz> <46B1D0DA.5030905@balister.org> <1186061255.5972.243.camel@hammer.suse.cz> <46B1E063.7010407@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> <1186064138.5972.259.camel@hammer.suse.cz> <46B1E812.8020706@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> <1186066059.5972.269.camel@hammer.suse.cz> <46B1F78F.4040700@klever.net> <46B1FC60.6030908@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> <46B1FDD8.8000404@klever.net> <46B20D9F.70704@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> <1186093013.6626.57.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1186132901.5972.314.camel@hammer.suse.cz> Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 12:32:43 +0100 Message-Id: <1186313563.5962.36.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: Gstreamer and rpath X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 11:35:07 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 11:21 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote: > Richard Purdie wrote: > > > I'm actually semi against forcing staging to look like an image. The > > fact gcc requires this for its sysroot option is a sign that they > > haven't got this right yet. > > > > With packaged staging we need to decide which way we go, separate > > staging packages or use the same ones as we use for images. > > > > My personal gut feeling is that separate ones will work better. They > > also mean we can handle the extra staging files like pkgmaps and perhaps > > handle multi machine easier. > > Well, the point of gcc --sysroot is a simplification of cross > compilation for those using complete sysroot environment. Yes, I understand that and I appreciate it does solve a certain mount of the problem! I just think it could be better and that it isn't a "solves everything" solution for OE. > But maybe there is possible to invent better method than the sysroot > design is. > > A random idea: > > Define TARGET_ROOT_MAP, which may use similar syntax like overlay > filesystems have. It will allow to construct sysroot by these > filesystems on fly as well, e. g. for use with emulators. That would be a much nicer solution. Staging could them have its own mapping and it should solve most of the problems we see. Have you any idea how difficult that would be to implement? Regards, Richard