From: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
To: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
Cc: John Keeping <john@metanate.com>, buildroot@buildroot.org
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [RFC PATCH] package/libiberty: use the same version as binutils
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2022 16:17:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220223151732.GB189337@scaer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220223155141.0223462b@windsurf>
Thomas, All,
On 2022-02-23 15:51 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 15:27:31 +0100
> "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote:
> > Although this works, this is by pure chance: binutils is included before
> > libiberty, so BINUTILS_VERSION is defined. But we try and avoid such a
> > situation, unless we explicitly guarantee the include ordering (eg. gcc,
> > fftw, util-linux, or previously, qt5).
> > Instead, in such a case, we prefer that the version strin is duplicated,
> > and a comment added above to note that both shoujld be updated in sync.
> > See for example bluez5_utils and bluez5_utils-headers, mesa3d and
> > mesa3d-headers.
> libiberty/binutils is different than mesa3d or bluez5_utils, as the
> version is user-selectable, or even different depending on the selected
> CPU architecture.
Right, I forgot about that... But still, I don't like that we rely on
the implied include order here, as we try and avoid that elsewhere...
> So we would have to replicate all the version selection logic (like we
> admittedly do for linux vs. linux-headers).
That would not be very convenient and maintainable in the long run, as
we update binutils to newer versions with various arch support changes:
indeed, as we can see here, we'd eventually forget to update libibert in
sync.
Unless we move libiberty as a sub-directory in pacage/binutils/libiberty/
(like for util-linux-libs) to make it obvious that we need to share the
version... That'd be my favourite option.
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.
--
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
| Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ |
| +33 561 099 427 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-23 15:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-23 11:55 [Buildroot] [RFC PATCH] package/libiberty: use the same version as binutils John Keeping
2022-02-23 14:27 ` Yann E. MORIN
2022-02-23 14:51 ` Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot
2022-02-23 15:17 ` Yann E. MORIN [this message]
2022-02-23 16:39 ` John Keeping
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220223151732.GB189337@scaer \
--to=yann.morin.1998@free.fr \
--cc=buildroot@buildroot.org \
--cc=john@metanate.com \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox