[Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/5] support/scripts/gen-bootlin-toolchains: add new script to support Bootlin toolchains

[Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>]

On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 23:21:12 +0200
"Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote:

> > We create a single external toolchain package, with a Kconfig "choice"
> > as a sub-option to select the toolchain variant to be used. The script
> > contains a Python dict that provides the mapping between the
> > toolchains provided by toolchains.bootlin.com, and the architecture
> > options/variants they are applicable to.  
> 
> I think it would be much better if that metadata were to be available on
> and served by toolchains.bootlin.com, possibly as a json blob (which
> maps very well to, and looks very much like, the python dict). Maybe one
> small json blurb for each toolchain.

What metadata exactly should be provided ? The only metadata that is
not provided by toolchains.bootlin.com today is which toolchain is
applicable to which Buildroot architecture variants.

But that is really Buildroot's business. I don't see why
toolchains.bootlin.com should maintain that sort of metadata. What if
then OpenEmbedded, PTXdist and OpenWrt also want to have their "custom
metadata" stored on toolchains.bootlin.com ?

> That way, when you add or remove toolchains, you are also responsible
> for updating that metadata on your side, and then the script is more
> generic.
> 
> Otherwise, that script will get out of sync when / if you change the
> configuration of a toolchain (e.g. if the x86-i686 toolchain bumps to at
> least i486 instead of i386).

Yes, I agree the script needs to be maintained, but what you're asking
is to push the "Buildroot integration complexity" to a project that is
in essence not related to Buildroot (beyond the fact that the
toolchains are generated by Buildroot of course).

Best regards,

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