Re: Native/Cross/SDK rethink (Was: Re: RFC: "Virtual" native and sdk recipes)

[Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>]

On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 06:29:24PM +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
> On 05-01-09 15:31, Esben Haabendal wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 5:37 AM, Tom Rini<trini@kernel.crashing.org>  wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 01:11:53AM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
>
>>>> This does reverse the logic that the current sdk class we use however
>>>> since MACHINE is now the machine we want to run the compiler on, not the
>>>> machine we want to compile for. It should be simple enough to add some
>>>> MACHINEs and version setups which correspond to a Linux 32 bit system, a
>>>> Linux 64 bit system and a windows system though. Assuming the choice of
>>>> TARGET for gcc-canadian is controlled by a variable like SDKTARGET, to
>>>> run the builds I'd want, I'd run:
>>>>
>>>> MACHINE=i686-generic   SDKTARGET=armv5te-generic bitbake gcc-canadian
>>>> MACHINE=x86-64-generic SDKTARGET=armv5te-generic bitbake gcc-canadian
>>>> MACHINE=winxp-generic  SDKTARGET=armv5te-generic bitbake gcc-canadian
>>> Or 'meta-toolchain-sbox' for an existing SDK type target.
>>
>> I'm sorry, but this seems like a dangerous way of starting confusion of terms.
>> MACHINE in how I see OE is really the _TARGET_, ie. the small device this all
>> is targeted at.
>
> MACHINE is where the generated stuff will _run_ on, so MACHINE=x86  
> SDKTARGET=armv5te would be more in line with what OE expects, but I  
> agree it can be confusing if you are thinking in autotools terms.

The real trick is the SDK is for a specific target machine.  Should
still be doable, just need to get some magic to deal with if SDKTARGET
being set, re-set MACHINE, except for some cases

-- 
Tom Rini