From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2012 22:00:39 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] Open question: remove "toolchain on target" option In-Reply-To: <201208111446.58278.minimod@morethan.org> References: <20120811202114.3a95d4ab@skate> <201208111446.58278.minimod@morethan.org> Message-ID: <20120811220039.0547c8f1@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello Michael, Le Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:46:53 -0500, "Michael S. Zick" a ?crit : > On Sat August 11 2012, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > ?(3) None of the core Buildroot developers seem to care about this, > > ? ? ?no-one is apparently using/fixing this mechanism. > > The only reason I can see in the argument against continuing support. > > A target native toolchain is one of the most often required set of > applications in the after-market embedded world. What do you call the "after-market embedded world"? Do you mean the usage of consumer electronic devices for things that go beyond their original purposes, by hobbyists? If it's the case, then I think we definitely want to support this use case, but I don't see how this use case requires a toolchain on the target. Could you expand a bit on what this use case is, and how it requires having a toolchain on the target? Somehow, your e-mail seems to convey some sort of frustration about Buildroot and/or its developers. What are the problems you are having? I am really interested in understanding for what reasons Buildroot is making people unhappy, and see if there are ways to improve that. Thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com