From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 23:37:12 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Different site methods for the main package and patches In-Reply-To: <53331268.4030205@mind.be> References: <53331268.4030205@mind.be> Message-ID: <20140326233712.4347c3c8@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 Wed, 26 Mar 2014 18:46:16 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > You're probably right about that. The problem is that the DOWNLOAD macro > cannot know if it is given a patch or the package itself. So it should > probably be changed to get _SITE_METHOD as an optional argument. > > Yann, perhaps you could take that up into your download method rework > series? Generally speaking, I'm a bit unhappy about how things work on the download front: *) I don't really understand why we have a separation between _SITE and _SOURCE, and why our infra assumes that _PATCH is relative to _SITE. Why don't we simply make _SOURCE and _PATCH full URLs instead? This way _PATCH can list multiple patches coming from different locations, not necessarily the upstream location of the package. *) Why is the DOWNLOAD macro looking at _SITE_METHOD ? It believe it should be a macro that remains independent of the package infrastructure, and it should simply take as argument the information that it needs, rather than poking directly into _SITE_METHOD. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com