[Buildroot] [PATCH v5 4/5] barebox: support 2nd config build

[Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>]

Hello,

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 11:18:46 +0200, Pieter Smith wrote:

>  boot/barebox/Config.in                |  2 +
>  boot/barebox/barebox-2/Config.in      | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  boot/barebox/barebox-2/barebox-2.hash |  1 +
>  boot/barebox/barebox-2/barebox-2.mk   |  9 +++++
>  boot/barebox/barebox.mk               |  3 ++

Regarding this one, I am not sure, there are two things that bother me
a bit:

 - The name "barebox-2", which I find a bit weird. What about
   "barebox-aux" or something like that, as opposed to "barebox-main" ?

 - The organization of the folders. Having the barebox "infra" + the
   main barebox package both defined in boot/barebox/barebox.mk seems
   weird. Ideally, I would have preferred something like:

   boot/barebox/barebox.mk <-- common infrastructure
   boot/barebox/barebox-main/ <-- the main Barebox
   boot/barebox/barebox-aux/  <-- the auxiliary Barebox

   Of course, some tricks will be needed to make the barebox-main/
   package behave properly when its options will still be named
   BR2_TARGET_BAREBOX_<foo> and not BR2_TARGET_BAREBOX_MAIN_<foo>.
   Alternatively, if that really doesn't work, what about:

   boot/barebox/barebox.mk <-- common infrastructure
   boot/barebox/barebox/ <-- the main Barebox
   boot/barebox/barebox-aux/  <-- the auxiliary Barebox

I've applied the first three patches of the series to ease your work,
but I'd like to see if we can get something a bit better for this
patch. I know Arnout has done a lot of review, so don't hesitate to let
me know if all this has already been discussed and why the current
organization has been chosen compared to something more similar to my
proposal.

Thanks!

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com