From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:13:47 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [RFC v1 05/14] autotools infrastructure: do the autoreconf as a post patch step In-Reply-To: <5105A7BF.4080701@mind.be> References: <1358725943-31485-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1358725943-31485-6-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <510452A9.4050805@mind.be> <20130127172748.29a8d6cf@skate> <5105A7BF.4080701@mind.be> Message-ID: <20130128091347.4f2288ca@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Arnout Vandecappelle, On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 23:18:39 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > > So maybe the > > autotools infrastructure needs a special hook in the generic > > infrastructure (rather than a normal post patch hook), to ensure > > that the autoreconf step gets executed after all post patch hooks? > > Or maybe (just thinking out loud here) there could be the > possibility for the package infrastructure to add additional steps in > the dependency chain. Something like > > ifeq ($$($(2)_AUTORECONF),YES) > $(2)_TARGET_AUTORECONFIGURE = $$($(3)_SRCDIR)/.stamp_autoreconfigured > $(1)-autoreconfigure: $(1)-patch $$($(2)_TARGET_AUTORECONFIGURE) > $(1)-configure: $(1)-autoreconfigure > endif Sounds interesting. I'll try to experiment around this idea. Thanks, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com