Re: RFC: "Virtual" native and sdk recipes

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

On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 12:54:50AM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
[snip]
> * I'm also not keen on the SDK_PREFIX -> SDK_PATH change. Why? It 
>   breaks things for people. In fact please back this out before merging 
>   anything above, I don't see a good reason for it.

I tried not doing that and got (for MACHINE=efika):
ERROR: Required build target 'canadian-sdk' has no buildable providers.
Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['canadian-sdk',
'virtual//OpenEmbedded/angstrom/powerpcbinutils']

That said, all I did was a quick dropping of the change.  I'm going to
make sure that my current rebasing on top of your current branch builds
for at least one target then I'll see about dropping the PREFIX->PATH
change again.  But, I'm unsure if we can, in the current overall SDK
implementation.  We do need to say "I need
runs-on-mingw32-builds-for-powerpc binutils".  So the SDK_PREFIX ->
SDK_PATH (in most cases) change makes sense.  We need one variable for
the runs-on-builds-for and one for installs-into.  Or is there a trick
I'm missing (aside from relocatible SDK, which I want)?

-- 
Tom Rini