[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] New package: googletest

[Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>]

Dear Stephan Hoffmann,

On Tue, 05 Feb 2013 17:27:48 +0100, Stephan Hoffmann wrote:

> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/package/gtest/Config.in
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
> >> +config BR2_PACKAGE_GTEST
> > Maybe the package directory should be named "googletest" and the option
> > BR2_PACKAGE_GOOGLETEST. But I'm not sure since the upstream tarball is
> > just "gtest".
> Hello Thomas,
> 
> first I named it googletest, but since it is named gtest upstream and
> unzip produces a directory with this name I decided to changed it.

Ok. The fact that we don't control the unzip output directory is a bit
annoying, but it's a separate matter.

In general we really try to keep a 1:1 mapping between:
 * the option name
 * the directory name
 * the name of the label attached to the configuration option in the
   menuconfig

With the current proposal, people would see a "googletest" label in
menuconfig, and might therefore look for package/googletest/... which
won't exist.

> > Even though I understand that it is composed only of a static library,
> > I find this GTEST_INSTALL_TARGET = NO a bit strange. But well, ok.
> Yes, it is, but when there is nothing to install? Maybe it's also
> possible to compile it to a .so, but I am not sure if it's worth the
> effort. This way we can use googletest on the target and, when the
> testuites are not instaled, do not waste any space there.

Ok.

> BTW: Running googletest on the target out of eclipse works well.

Does it mean that you're using the Eclipse Buildroot plugin?

> I didn't find any. Of course it would be nicer. As far as I understand
> the documentation one shall point the compiler and linker to the build
> directory.

Ok.

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com