[Buildroot] [PATCH 03/21 v2] core: move pkg-utils.mk to support/

[Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>]

Arnout, All,

On 2015-10-22 23:10 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly:
> On 22-10-15 22:33, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> > pkg-utils.mk contains various definitions that are used in the package
> > infrastructures and packages themselves.
> > 
> > However, those definitions can be useful in other parts of Buildroot,
> > and are already used in a few places that are not related to the package
> > infrastructure. Also, $(sep) will be needed early in the Makefile when
> > we eventually support multiple br2-external trees.
> > 
> > Since this file only contains definitions, we can include it anytime.
> > 
> > So, consider that file to no longer be specific to the package infras:
> >   - move it to support and rename it,
> >   - move a few similar definitions from the main Makefile to that file.
> 
>  Actually I think a lot more should move to support. For instance, pkg-* is
> actually not just for packages but also for linux, bootloaders, toolchain. And
> even package/Makefile.in (with a better name then :-).

I do agree. But I think this can be done in a separate series.

The current series is about adding multi-br2-external support, so only
includes whatever is necessary to achieve that goal.

I can queue a rework of the support materials as you suggest, but that
will be done in a separate series (and hopefully not a requirement
before this one is condered! ;-) ).

> > Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
> > Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
> > Cc: Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@uclibc.org>
> > ---
> >  Makefile              | 10 ++-----
> >  package/pkg-utils.mk  | 59 ----------------------------------------
> >  support/misc/utils.mk | 74 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
>  If you agree that more stuff should move to support, I think there should be a
> new directory support/make or support/mk.

As I said, we can move it later when doing the support rework.

>  BTW, why didn't the rename detection catch this? Did you change too much? In
> that case, perhaps it's better to do it in two patches? :-P

It was not caught because it is less than 50% (actually, 49%!) so git did
not detect a copy (or a rename either).

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'