From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 07:58:39 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v4 1/3] package/mono: enable mono library compilation In-Reply-To: <1423748972-17471-2-git-send-email-angelo.compagnucci@gmail.com> References: <1423748972-17471-1-git-send-email-angelo.compagnucci@gmail.com> <1423748972-17471-2-git-send-email-angelo.compagnucci@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20150214075839.5ee08252@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Angelo Compagnucci, On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 14:49:30 +0100, Angelo Compagnucci wrote: > diff --git a/package/mono/mono.mk b/package/mono/mono.mk > index 0bbf338..9ec3c24 100644 > --- a/package/mono/mono.mk > +++ b/package/mono/mono.mk > @@ -21,7 +21,6 @@ MONO_AUTORECONF = YES > MONO_CONF_OPTS = --disable-gtk-doc \ > --with-mcs-docs=no \ > --with-moonlight=no \ > - --disable-libraries \ > --with-ikvm-native=no \ > --enable-minimal=aot,profiler,debug \ > --disable-mcs-build \ Apparently, Mono was working fine with --disable-libraries, as long as no third party libraries are used. So should we make this optional instead? What is the size impact of this (i.e a Mono build with --disable-libraries, and a Mono build without --disable-libraries), in terms of installed size? If the size difference is small compared to the overall size of Mono, then I'm fine for doing it unconditionally. Could you comment on this? Thanks, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com