[Buildroot] [PATCH] enhance directfb configurability

[Buildroot] [PATCH] enhance directfb configurability

[Micha Nelissen]

Hi,

Here is a patch to widen options to configure directfb.

Micha
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: directfb.diff
Url: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20081004/e17b290c/attachment.txt 

[Buildroot] [PATCH] enhance directfb configurability

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Thiago A. Corr?a <thiago.correa@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] enhance directfb configurability
To: Micha Nelissen <micha@neli.hopto.org>


[...]
> +               --with-inputdrivers=$(DIRECTFB_INPUT) \
> +               --enable-static \

I'm not sure if forcing static lib on everyone is the right thing. If
there is only one application on the system that depends on DirectFB,
it might save some bytes, but if there are more than 1, shared lib
would be prefered.

The rest seams to be quite good improvements.

Kind Regards,
  Thiago A. Correa

PS: Sorry, forgot to include the list address.

[Buildroot] [PATCH] enhance directfb configurability

[Micha Nelissen]

Thiago A. Corr?a wrote:
> I'm not sure if forcing static lib on everyone is the right thing. If
> there is only one application on the system that depends on DirectFB,
> it might save some bytes, but if there are more than 1, shared lib
> would be prefered.

Wouldn't shared lib linking be the default? The static variant would 
need to be referenced explicitly by someone who wants to use it; but at 
least it's available. It also would only exist in the staging_dir, not 
the target dir.

Thanks,
Micha

[Buildroot] [PATCH] enhance directfb configurability

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 1:00 PM, Micha Nelissen <micha@neli.hopto.org> wrote:
> Thiago A. Corr?a wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure if forcing static lib on everyone is the right thing. If
>> there is only one application on the system that depends on DirectFB,
>> it might save some bytes, but if there are more than 1, shared lib
>> would be prefered.
>
> Wouldn't shared lib linking be the default? The static variant would need to
> be referenced explicitly by someone who wants to use it; but at least it's
> available. It also would only exist in the staging_dir, not the target dir.
>

Hmmm I'm not sure about the linking order. But then you are saying
that even with --enable-static DirectFB will build the shared lib too?
Others like Qt (embedded and desktop) only builds the static if you
specify you want the static. I apply here and give it a try then. :)

Regards,
   Thiago A. Correa

[Buildroot] [PATCH] enhance directfb configurability

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

>> Wouldn't shared lib linking be the default? The static variant would need to
>> be referenced explicitly by someone who wants to use it; but at least it's
>> available. It also would only exist in the staging_dir, not the target dir.
>>
>
> Hmmm I'm not sure about the linking order. But then you are saying
> that even with --enable-static DirectFB will build the shared lib too?
> Others like Qt (embedded and desktop) only builds the static if you
> specify you want the static. I apply here and give it a try then. :)
>

Ok, it built both static and shared. Seams ok, so I commited (r23621)
with some small fixes.
Thanks!

Kind Regards,
   Thiago A. Correa