From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 11:05:52 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 4/9] docs/manual: document gcc version dependencies In-Reply-To: <20150804195858.GW3647@free.fr> References: <1438711241-31792-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1438711241-31792-5-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20150804195858.GW3647@free.fr> Message-ID: <20150805110552.1846c7bf@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 Yann E. MORIN, On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 21:58:58 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > > +* GCC version > > +** Dependency symbol: +BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_X_Y+, (replace > > + +X_Y+ with the proper version, see +toolchain/toolchain-common.in+) > > +** Comment string: +gcc >= X.Y+ and/or `gcc <= X.Y` (replace > > One of the condition is between ++ and the other between ``. I konow you > just replicated what was done for the kernel headers, but wuld it not be > better to use only ++ (or only ``, I don't mind) but not both? There is actually a good reason for that: if you use +...+ for +gcc <= X.Y+, then the <= gets replaced by the <= mathematic character rather than being the two characters < and =. So I've kept the special use of `...` for the time being. Thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com