From: Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] User-enabled host packages?
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 22:53:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201109222253.42536.arnout@mind.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110921153133.2d816865@skate>
On Wednesday 21 September 2011 15:31:33, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > So the big question is: do we want some host packages to be enabled
> > vie a user option?
We already have one: BR2_PACKAGE_GDB_HOST.
Other possible candidates are the installers for boot loaders (grub,
syslinux), target image manipulation programs (parted, fdisk, e2fsprogs,
uboot-tools), tools to communicate with the target (openocd, tftpd), and maybe
even scripting languages for running test suites (expect, python).
However, I'm not sure of the value of having these in the .config. If I need
them, it's anyway for use in build scripts that run on top of buildroot, and
then I can just run a "make world host-e2fsprogs". The paths to the host
tools are anyway so long that even when you need them in your shell, typing an
additional make host-xxx first is really no effort.
> > Where do we want these user options?
> > How about a newly created "Host tools" menu at top level?
That would mean they don't sit in their package's Config.in. Still, it would
be the most logical place. Anyway there normally is no impact on the
package's makefile since the config option is taken care of by GENTARGETS.
> > Does anybody have additional examples in favor or against?
I don't have anything against it. But no real driving reason for it either.
> 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 ?
Similar as for the boundary between when to have a configuration option for
different versions of a package. Depends on what users need.
Can someone summarize the arguments that were used when this discussion took
place a few years ago?
Regards,
Arnout
--
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286540
Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint: 31BB CF53 8660 6F88 345D 54CC A836 5879 20D7 CF43
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-22 20:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-21 13:00 [Buildroot] User-enabled host packages? Luca Ceresoli
2011-09-21 13:31 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2011-09-22 20:15 ` Luca Ceresoli
2011-09-22 20:53 ` Arnout Vandecappelle [this message]
2011-09-23 7:46 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2011-09-30 12:50 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2011-09-30 13:50 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2011-09-30 14:04 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2011-09-30 16:46 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2011-09-30 17:58 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2011-09-30 18:29 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2011-09-30 21:57 ` Luca Ceresoli
2011-10-01 20:11 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
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=201109222253.42536.arnout@mind.be \
--to=arnout@mind.be \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox