From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:31:33 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] User-enabled host packages? In-Reply-To: <4E79E001.7010409@lucaceresoli.net> References: <4E79E001.7010409@lucaceresoli.net> Message-ID: <20110921153133.2d816865@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Le Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:00:49 +0200, Luca Ceresoli a ?crit : > All of these examples are about tools that could generally be > downloaded, built and installed by each developer on their own > machine. Nevertheless any developer may benefit from having them > built inside buildroot: it would be more handy and quick to build > them, and also guarantee that the version used in buildroot is > somehow tested by other buildroot users. > > Moreover, some packages (such as omap-u-boot-utils for which I posted > a patch) have their own right of being inside buildroot because they > also contribute to building the BR images. Having a user option to > build them, even if they are not required for image generation, would > require little effort. > > So the big question is: do we want some host packages to be enabled > vie a user option? > > Where do we want these user options? > How about a newly created "Host tools" menu at top level? > > Does anybody have additional examples in favor or against? And also: If we decide to show /some/ host tools (but not all) in menuconfig, what is the boundary between host tools visible in menuconfig and those not visible in menuconfig ? Regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com