[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/cryptopp: add Config.in.host

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/cryptopp: add Config.in.host

[Carlos Santos]

Signed-off-by: Carlos Santos <casantos@datacom.com.br>
---
 package/Config.in.host          | 1 +
 package/cryptopp/Config.in.host | 6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 package/cryptopp/Config.in.host

diff --git a/package/Config.in.host b/package/Config.in.host
index 76e619b13e..2211345a7b 100644
--- a/package/Config.in.host
+++ b/package/Config.in.host
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ menu "Host utilities"
 	source "package/checksec/Config.in.host"
 	source "package/cmake/Config.in.host"
 	source "package/cramfs/Config.in.host"
+	source "package/cryptopp/Config.in.host"
 	source "package/cryptsetup/Config.in.host"
 	source "package/dfu-util/Config.in.host"
 	source "package/dos2unix/Config.in.host"
diff --git a/package/cryptopp/Config.in.host b/package/cryptopp/Config.in.host
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..03170cbcf1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/package/cryptopp/Config.in.host
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+config BR2_PACKAGE_HOST_CRYPTOPP
+	bool "host cryptopp"
+	help
+	  A free C++ class library of cryptographic schemes
+
+	  https://www.cryptopp.com/
-- 
2.19.2

[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] package/tegrarcm: select host-cryptopp and drop BR2_arm dependency

[Carlos Santos]

- It is not be strictly necessary to select host-cryptopp but let's do
  it like other host packages do.

- There is no reason to depend on the target architecture, since it's a
  host tool.

Yes, we could have separate commits to select host-cryptopp and drop
BR2_arm dependency but that would be overkill.

Signed-off-by: Carlos Santos <casantos@datacom.com.br>
---
 package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host b/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
index d8cbb947d6..3411501a72 100644
--- a/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
+++ b/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 config BR2_PACKAGE_HOST_TEGRARCM
 	bool "host tegrarcm"
-	depends on BR2_arm || BR2_armeb
+	select BR2_PACKAGE_HOST_CRYPTOPP
 	help
 	  This program is used to send code to a Tegra device in
 	  recovery mode.
-- 
2.19.2

[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] package/tegrarcm: select host-cryptopp and drop BR2_arm dependency

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:56:05 -0200, Carlos Santos wrote:
> - It is not be strictly necessary to select host-cryptopp but let's do
>   it like other host packages do.
> 
> - There is no reason to depend on the target architecture, since it's a
>   host tool.
> 
> Yes, we could have separate commits to select host-cryptopp and drop
> BR2_arm dependency but that would be overkill.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Carlos Santos <casantos@datacom.com.br>
> ---
>  package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host b/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
> index d8cbb947d6..3411501a72 100644
> --- a/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
> +++ b/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
>  config BR2_PACKAGE_HOST_TEGRARCM
>  	bool "host tegrarcm"
> -	depends on BR2_arm || BR2_armeb

The idea of this dependency is that since tegracrm is only useful in
conjunction with a Tegra-based system, there is not reason to build it
if the target isn't ARM.

> +	select BR2_PACKAGE_HOST_CRYPTOPP

So we are starting to add Config.in.host options for all packages ? Why
are you doing this change ? What is the motivation ?

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] package/tegrarcm: select host-cryptopp and drop BR2_arm dependency

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 12/12/2018 09:46, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:56:05 -0200, Carlos Santos wrote:
>> - It is not be strictly necessary to select host-cryptopp but let's do
>>   it like other host packages do.
>>
>> - There is no reason to depend on the target architecture, since it's a
>>   host tool.
>>
>> Yes, we could have separate commits to select host-cryptopp and drop
>> BR2_arm dependency but that would be overkill.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Carlos Santos <casantos@datacom.com.br>
>> ---
>>  package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host b/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
>> index d8cbb947d6..3411501a72 100644
>> --- a/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
>> +++ b/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
>> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
>>  config BR2_PACKAGE_HOST_TEGRARCM
>>  	bool "host tegrarcm"
>> -	depends on BR2_arm || BR2_armeb
> 
> The idea of this dependency is that since tegracrm is only useful in
> conjunction with a Tegra-based system, there is not reason to build it
> if the target isn't ARM.
> 
>> +	select BR2_PACKAGE_HOST_CRYPTOPP
> 
> So we are starting to add Config.in.host options for all packages ? Why
> are you doing this change ? What is the motivation ?

 I think it's because I said "We need Config.in.host" :-)

 Carlos, the move to Config.in.host is a bit more extensive. We not only need to
add Config.in.host files for all packages, we also need to add selects - which
you do here.

 Of course we can't do it all in one big shot, but still it should probably be
approached in a somewhat more structured way. For example, when we add a
Config.in.host for a package, we also (perhaps in a separate commit) add the
select statements for it in all packages that depend on it.


 Also note that the idea was to make these Config.in.host options blind (i.e.
promptless).

 Regards,
 Arnout

[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] package/tegrarcm: select host-cryptopp and drop BR2_arm dependency

[Carlos Santos]

> From: "Arnout Vandecappelle" <arnout@mind.be>
> To: "Thomas Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>, "Carlos Santos" <casantos@datacom.com.br>
> Cc: "buildroot" <buildroot@buildroot.org>
> Sent: Quarta-feira, 12 de dezembro de 2018 7:04:25
> Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] package/tegrarcm: select host-cryptopp and drop BR2_arm dependency

> On 12/12/2018 09:46, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:56:05 -0200, Carlos Santos wrote:
>>> - It is not be strictly necessary to select host-cryptopp but let's do
>>>   it like other host packages do.
>>>
>>> - There is no reason to depend on the target architecture, since it's a
>>>   host tool.
>>>
>>> Yes, we could have separate commits to select host-cryptopp and drop
>>> BR2_arm dependency but that would be overkill.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Carlos Santos <casantos@datacom.com.br>
>>> ---
>>>  package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host b/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
>>> index d8cbb947d6..3411501a72 100644
>>> --- a/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
>>> +++ b/package/tegrarcm/Config.in.host
>>> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
>>>  config BR2_PACKAGE_HOST_TEGRARCM
>>>  	bool "host tegrarcm"
>>> -	depends on BR2_arm || BR2_armeb
>> 
>> The idea of this dependency is that since tegracrm is only useful in
>> conjunction with a Tegra-based system, there is not reason to build it
>> if the target isn't ARM.
>> 
>>> +	select BR2_PACKAGE_HOST_CRYPTOPP
>> 
>> So we are starting to add Config.in.host options for all packages ? Why
>> are you doing this change ? What is the motivation ?
> 
> I think it's because I said "We need Config.in.host" :-)

Right. :-)

> Carlos, the move to Config.in.host is a bit more extensive. We not only need to
> add Config.in.host files for all packages, we also need to add selects - which
> you do here.

Yes, tegrarcm is the only package depending in host-cryptopp.

> Of course we can't do it all in one big shot, but still it should probably be
> approached in a somewhat more structured way. For example, when we add a
> Config.in.host for a package, we also (perhaps in a separate commit) add the
> select statements for it in all packages that depend on it.
> 
> 
> Also note that the idea was to make these Config.in.host options blind (i.e.
> promptless).

Make sense if the host package exists only to support building another
package (that selects and depends on it) but there are other reasons
why a host package may be necessary, e.g. I need host-mtools for a
post-image script.

-- 
Carlos Santos (Casantos) - DATACOM, P&D

[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] package/tegrarcm: select host-cryptopp and drop BR2_arm dependency

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello Carlos,

On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 07:59:08 -0200 (BRST), Carlos Santos wrote:

> > Of course we can't do it all in one big shot, but still it should probably be
> > approached in a somewhat more structured way. For example, when we add a
> > Config.in.host for a package, we also (perhaps in a separate commit) add the
> > select statements for it in all packages that depend on it.
> > 
> > 
> > Also note that the idea was to make these Config.in.host options blind (i.e.
> > promptless).  
> 
> Make sense if the host package exists only to support building another
> package (that selects and depends on it) but there are other reasons
> why a host package may be necessary, e.g. I need host-mtools for a
> post-image script.

Yes, of course, we want *some* host packages to be visible in
menuconfig.

Basically, the current situation is:

 * Most host packages don't have any Config.in.host options (blind or
   visible), because they are merely build dependencies of other
   packages.

 * A few host packages do have a visible Config.in.host because they
   are useful by themselves, and not just as a build dependency of
   something else: image generation tools, flashing tools, qemu, etc.

The idea we have for the future is:

 * All host packages have a Config.in.host option.

 * The host packages that are only build dependencies of other packages
   have a blind Config.in.host option

 * The host packages that are useful by themselves continue to have a
   visible Config.in.host option.

Does that clarify where we want to go ?

Best regards,

Thomas Petazzoni
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com