From: Sam Bobroff <sam.bobroff@au1.ibm.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 2/6] Add documentation for merged defconfigs
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 13:35:04 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160706033503.GA4610@tungsten.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160705081644.6fd47292@free-electrons.com>
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 08:16:44AM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello Sam,
>
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2016 16:06:25 +1000, Sam Bobroff wrote:
>
> > > Instead we recommend to use merge_config.sh from outside of Buildroot to
> > > generate the merged defconfig before calling make. Maybe we should add some
> > > documentation in the manual to explain how to use it.
> >
> > That seems fine, it might even be possible to add something to
> > $(BR2_EXTERNAL)/external.mk to hook it directly into the Makefiles.
> >
> > Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by using merge_config.sh outside of
> > buildroot? Would the fragment files still be checked into buildroot somewhere
> > (but just not hooked into the build system) or would they be maintained outside
> > it?
>
> The idea is that Buildroot just takes as input a configuration file.
> How this configuration file is provided/generated is not Buildroot's
> responsibility.
>
> For example, you could have in your BR2_EXTERNAL tree a bunch of
> defconfig fragments, and then a "genconfig" shell script to generate the
> final configuration you want to build using the defconfig fragments.
> This "genconfig" script relies on merge_config.sh to actually merge the
> relevant fragments together.
>
Ah right, yes I'm sure something like that will work for work that stays
external to buildroot, but the case I'm concerned about is where BR2_EXTERNAL
isn't being used. We want to get our defconfigs out there for everyone to use
and contribute to :-) It looks like existing defconfigs could make use of this
too: from a bit of diff'ing in the configs directory there are already configs
that share a lot of values and would be easier to maintain using merging.
So how would you suggest handling merged configs that should be contributed
back to the community? Would you expect that we maintain our own merge-config
system and fragments and then contribute the full configs back to buildroot?
That seems like the simplest way to do it but I can't see a good way to handle
patches to them: users who have downloaded buildroot would have the defconfigs
but not the input fragments that were used to create them, so it would be
difficult to handle changes they need to make.
Would an alternative approach be to include the fragments and genconfig system
in buildroot but make it a separate component, so it wouldn't add complexity to
the build system? (e.g. you "make configs" to update your defconfigs.)
Cheers,
Sam.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-06 3:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-29 5:06 [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 0/6] Makefile: Support merged and nested defconfigs Sam Bobroff
2016-06-29 5:06 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 1/6] Add support for merged defconfigs Sam Bobroff
2016-07-01 8:47 ` Romain Naour
2016-07-05 5:44 ` Sam Bobroff
2016-06-29 5:06 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 2/6] Add documentation " Sam Bobroff
2016-07-01 13:18 ` Romain Naour
2016-07-05 6:06 ` Sam Bobroff
2016-07-05 6:16 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2016-07-06 3:35 ` Sam Bobroff [this message]
2016-07-05 19:32 ` Patrick Williams
2016-07-05 22:13 ` Samuel Mendoza-Jonas
2016-07-05 22:41 ` Patrick Williams
2016-07-06 19:08 ` Romain Naour
2016-07-06 20:56 ` Yann E. MORIN
2016-06-29 5:06 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 3/6] Makefile: Generate %_defconfig recipes from macro Sam Bobroff
2016-06-29 5:06 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 4/6] Makefile: Support nested config directories Sam Bobroff
2016-06-29 5:06 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 5/6] Makefile: Add nested config dirs to list-defconfigs Sam Bobroff
2016-06-29 5:06 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 6/6] Makefile: Add merged defconfigs " Sam Bobroff
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160706033503.GA4610@tungsten.ozlabs.ibm.com \
--to=sam.bobroff@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.