From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2017 23:51:27 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 3/4] toolchain-external: copy ld*.so* for all C libraries In-Reply-To: References: <20170702134107.11488-1-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20170702134107.11488-4-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20170702235127.14b7ca48@windsurf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Sun, 2 Jul 2017 21:21:46 +0200, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote: > > diff --git a/toolchain/toolchain-external/pkg-toolchain-external.mk b/toolchain/toolchain-external/pkg-toolchain-external.mk > > index 8460e37..c1c3900 100644 > > --- a/toolchain/toolchain-external/pkg-toolchain-external.mk > > +++ b/toolchain/toolchain-external/pkg-toolchain-external.mk > > @@ -107,13 +107,11 @@ endif > > # > > # Definitions of the list of libraries that should be copied to the target. > > # > > + > > +TOOLCHAIN_EXTERNAL_LIBS += ld*.so* > > In copy_toolchain_sysroot, the patterns ld*.so and ld*.so.* are > treated separately. I think the only reason must be to avoid matching > ld*.something (I can't think of another reason at this moment). > Perhaps that is too far-fetched, and copy_toolchain_sysroot should be > updated, but in any case it makes sense to line up. I think it's a separate issue, because we're already using ld*.so* today in pkg-toolchain-external.mk for TOOLCHAIN_EXTERNAL_LIBS, I'm just moving it around. However, I agree we should probably line up things. In which direction do you think we should line up? I guess using ld*.so* in copy_toolchain_sysroot should be fine. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com