From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 22:50:53 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [git commit master 1/1] Use sys-root rather than sysroot for the sysroot/staging_dir In-Reply-To: <201101252239.36666.yann.morin.1998@anciens.enib.fr> References: <20110125150944.2C7438D244@busybox.osuosl.org> <201101252239.36666.yann.morin.1998@anciens.enib.fr> Message-ID: <20110125225053.49f7660b@surf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 22:39:36 +0100 "Yann E. MORIN" wrote: > As Thomas said on IRC, I would suggest to revert this. Is there anything > in BR that depends on the sysroot being named 'sysroot' or 'sys-root' at all, > or was that just an eye-candy change? (genuine question) Just for the record, my preference for "sysroot" instead of "sys-root" is because all sysroot-related options in gcc use the "sysroot" spelling and not "sys-root" : -print-sysroot -print-sysroot-headers-suffix --sysroot And all gcc documentation refers to it as the "sysroot" : `-print-sysroot' Print the target sysroot directory that will be used during compilation. This is the target sysroot specified either at configure time or using the `--sysroot' option, possibly with an extra suffix that depends on compilation options. If no target sysroot is specified, the option prints nothing. Regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com