From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 10:50:07 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] List of pending patches: what to do? In-Reply-To: References: <20130731191415.545f7dff@skate> <20130801182311.6bb6e57e@skate> Message-ID: <20130802105007.6957b0da@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Thomas De Schampheleire, On Fri, 2 Aug 2013 10:33:18 +0200, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote: > I am currently used to -reconfigure and -rebuild to rebuild also the > rootfs, but I also agree it's inconsistent with the other targets. If > we want to be strict, then foo-reconfigure can only configure, not > build. And foo-rebuild can only build. Yerk, that's a bit ugly. foo-reconfigure removes the configure, build stamp files as well as the host, staging, images and target install stamp files. foo-rebuild does the same, except for the configure stamp file. So, I would find it strange if foo-reconfigure only did the configure again and not the entire package build process. Same for foo-rebuild. Remember, the use case for those is someone who is actively working on the source code of a package (mainly when using the OVERRIDE_SRCDIR thing or the local site method) and wants to be able to restart the build of the package, just as if he was running 'make && make install' in his package source code. So the intention is really to have 'make foo-rebuild' do that 'make && make install' for the user, for the package . Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com