From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2020 10:24:25 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/libnspr: bump to version 4.25, add xtensa support In-Reply-To: <20200201084758.285234-1-bernd.kuhls@t-online.de> References: <20200201084758.285234-1-bernd.kuhls@t-online.de> Message-ID: <20200201102425.1556253b@windsurf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 09:47:57 +0100 Bernd Kuhls wrote: > nspr 4.25 added support for Xtensa architecture: > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.tech.nspr/lK7toqtJ96E > > Removed BR2_PACKAGE_LIBNSPR_ARCH_SUPPORT because it was only needed for > xtensa. > > Added sha1 hash provided by upstream. > > Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls I don't feel very strongly about it, but I'm wondering if it doesn't make sense to keep BR2_PACKAGE_LIBNSPR_ARCH_SUPPORT. There is some architecture-specific code in libnpsr, so every time we add a new CPU architecture, we would have to poentially re-add this hidden option. More specifically, I have been working on using Buildroot for a new CPU architecture (not yet upstream, but will be submitted in the future), and it was quite nice to have this BR2_PACKAGE_LIBNPSR_ARCH_SUPPORT to disable libnpsr on this CPU architecture for the moment. But again, I don't feel very strongly, it can very well be re-added later if need be. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com