From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Baruch Siach Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 11:02:15 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v2] libnspr: Add dependency on !BR2_xtensa In-Reply-To: <20131127092720.77f97fd0@skate> References: <20131127092720.77f97fd0@skate> Message-ID: <20131127090215.GX32436@tarshish> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi Thomas, On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:27:20AM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:29:24 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote: > > From: Chris Zankel > > > > Xtensa is not yet supported in libnspr. Also add dependencies to > > libnss, which requires libnspr, and ecryptfs-utils, which requires > > libnss. > > > > Fixes > > http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/14b/14ba6426edbffa100de924aa69157b3f59368ff2/ > > > > [baruch: fix summary, add autobuild referench, add comment dependency] > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Zankel > > Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach > > Thanks! However, I wonder if it's not actually easier to include a > patch to libnspr to add Xtensa support. See > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/291080/ for a patch that adds NIOS2 > support, for example. That would obviously be better, but I can't properly test a patch adding libnspr xtensa support at the moment. Note that xtensa has BE and LE variants, so it's a little more involved that the nios patch. > That being said, I'm fine with having libnspr disabled on Xtensa, as I > don't believe that many people will care about > libnspr/libnss/ecryptfs-utils. It seems like blackfin needs the same treatment (http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/dd353703ed94cec48cd126d80cd2f1b039811be4/). baruch -- http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -