From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?B?R2HDq2w=?= PORTAY Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 17:11:36 -0400 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 0/9] qt5: install missing examples In-Reply-To: <20180617224837.33949a3a@windsurf> References: <20180612123206.31523-1-gael.portay@savoirfairelinux.com> <20180617144442.3fc03f6e@windsurf> <20180617200551.l2kb6yky7w3mfacg@archlinux> <20180617224837.33949a3a@windsurf> Message-ID: <20180617211136.soa74rty7nxqjs7h@archlinux> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Thomas, On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 10:48:37PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > (...) > > > > There is INSTALL_ROOT variable which looks to be equivalent to DESTDIR. > > Yes, but no. The problem is that with the way things are currently > setup, if you set INSTALL_ROOT to /foo/bar and STAGING_DIR > is /home/thomas/buildroot/output/staging, then Qt5 stuff will be > installed in: > > /foo/bar/home/thomas/buildroot/output/staging > > Which is obviously wrong. And I believe the fact that it does this is > due to: > > -sysroot $(STAGING_DIR) \ > > when configuring Qt5. Some research is needed to see if a better > solution is possible :-) > I will have a look to that. I have started a fresh build with few modifications on pathes. I think it is because of the prefix in qt.conf.in which is sed to $(HOST_DIR). [Paths] Prefix=@@HOST_DIR@@ ... Libraries=/usr/lib ... Binaries=/usr/bin ... I will see. > > Also, I was thinking about a qmake-package or a qt5module-package. > > A qmake-package infrastructure might make sense. But beware of Qt4/Qt5 > compatibility. But to me, fixing the first problem is much more > important/useful. > For sure... My first run is to rewrite all _INSTALL_TARGET (if possible) using: $(MAKE) -C ... install INSTALL_ROOT=$(TARGET_DIR) > Thanks! > > Thomas > -- > Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering > https://bootlin.com