From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 21:14:43 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] bluez5_utils: Add config option to install "bdaddr" In-Reply-To: <20170214160844.ts44yh2l4ghzwvad@tarshish> References: <1487084632-16396-1-git-send-email-vishalthanki@gmail.com> <20170214160844.ts44yh2l4ghzwvad@tarshish> Message-ID: <20170214211443.00dc1a10@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Tue, 14 Feb 2017 18:08:44 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote: > > +config BR2_PACKAGE_BLUEZ5_TOOLS_BDADDR > > + bool "install bdaddr tool" > > + depends on BR2_PACKAGE_BLUEZ5_UTILS_EXPERIMENTAL > > + help > > + The "bdaddr" tool is used for changing the Bluetooth device address. > > bdaddr is less than 100KB. I don't think it's worth another config option. > 100KB is negligible when you already have glib and dbus. I'd suggested to > either install bdaddr unconditionally, or have a single option for all tools/ > executables that are not covered by another config option already. I would tend to agree, but we already have options like BR2_PACKAGE_BLUEZ5_UTILS_GATTTOOL to install a single tool. How many tools are provided by bluez5_utils? If it's just a very small set of tools, it's OK to have one option for each. But if there are many small tools, we definitely don't want to have one option for each. In any case, we need to provide a better guideline to Vishal, because right now, we are not explaining how the patch should be fixed. If we introduce something like BR2_PACKAGE_BLUEZ5_UTILS_TOOLS, then what should be done with BR2_PACKAGE_BLUEZ5_UTILS_CLIENT or BR2_PACKAGE_BLUEZ5_UTILS_GATTTOOL for example ? Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com