From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 2/2] toolchainfile.cmake: rework the Buildroot flags addition
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 23:18:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161003231809.1b84ec79@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161001163314.10173-2-s.martin49@gmail.com>
Hello,
On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 18:33:14 +0200, Samuel Martin wrote:
> Thus, due to these CMake specifics, the implementation should take care
> of a couple of things:
> - keeping the per-package customization of the standard CMake flags;
> - making sure the Buildroot's flags are added into the standard CMake
> flags;
> - avoid introducing duplicates in resulting CMake flags.
>
> So, this change introduces an helper in the toolchainfile.cmake file
> that will extend the standard CMake flags variables with the flags
> defined by Buildroot only when they are not already present (i.e. only
> the first time the toolchain file is processed by CMake when configuring
> a project).
> Then, this helper is used to extend any standard CMake flags variables.
This looks very complicated. What about not passing those
CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS at all from the toolchain file?
After all, for other packages (generic-package or autotools-package),
we are currently:
* Passing some of the CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS hardcoded into the wrapper. This
also applies and works well for CMake packages.
* Passing some of the CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS in the environment, when
configuring/building. There is no reason why this shouldn't be done
for CMake as well.
So what about giving up on passing TARGET_CFLAGS/TARGET_CXXFLAGS in the
CMake toolchain file, and instead pass them explicitly when configuring
CMake, in the <pkg>_CONFIGURE_CMDS of pkg-cmake.mk.
Would this solve the problem without this awfully complicated CMake
toolchain file?
Best regards,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-03 21:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-01 16:33 [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/2] DEVELOPERS: update my entry list Samuel Martin
2016-10-01 16:33 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 2/2] toolchainfile.cmake: rework the Buildroot flags addition Samuel Martin
2016-10-03 21:18 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2016-10-04 21:12 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2016-10-03 21:19 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/2] DEVELOPERS: update my entry list Thomas Petazzoni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161003231809.1b84ec79@free-electrons.com \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox