From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2019 09:04:08 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v4 1/1] package/libsodium: add config for full build In-Reply-To: References: <20190923082902.28472-1-adrien@gallouet.fr> <20190928231934.236e5f83@windsurf> Message-ID: <20190929090408.67e6d38e@windsurf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 23:49:56 +0200 Adrien Gallou?t wrote: > > But then, does it make sense to invert the option and name it > > BR2_PACKAGE_LIBSODIUM_MINIMAL ? It would match the > > --enable-minimal/--disable-minimal autoconf options of libsodium. > > That was my first patch :) Do you want me to resubmit it ? I don't have a very clear-cut opinion. On one hand, it is weird to have a Config.in option to reduce/remove something. But on the other hand, it makes sense to have Config.in options that are as much as possible mapped to the corresponding options provided by the package build system. Arnout, Peter, any preference ? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com