[Buildroot] config update

[Buildroot] config update

[Heikki Lindholm]

Hello,

I just updated my OS X buildroot and, recent changes breaking it, I have 
to ask, why was packages/config updated? It worked just fine - even on 
OS X - before the bump to linux 2.6.21* config system. Were there 
features missing from the old version or something?

-- Heikki Lindholm

[Buildroot] config update

[Bernhard Fischer]

On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 09:23:10AM +0300, Heikki Lindholm wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I just updated my OS X buildroot and, recent changes breaking it, I have 

Can you please be more specific as to how it broke?
TIA,

>to ask, why was packages/config updated? It worked just fine - even on 
>OS X - before the bump to linux 2.6.21* config system. Were there 
>features missing from the old version or something?

The i18n support was basically not working right. Apart from better
colour-handling (vie the respective env vars, see source) this was about
the only reason for the update. As to the libintl breakage, please refer
to several bug-reports in the bugtracker.

As said above, please show me what broke so we can fix it up for good.

[Buildroot] config update

[Heikki Lindholm]

Bernhard Fischer kirjoitti:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 09:23:10AM +0300, Heikki Lindholm wrote:
> 
>>Hello,
>>
>>I just updated my OS X buildroot and, recent changes breaking it, I have 
> 
> 
> Can you please be more specific as to how it broke?

Well, basically, it was easier to fix than thought, and I posted a patch 
already:
http://buildroot.uclibc.org/lists/buildroot/2007-July/003659.html

The two culprits for the breakage are:
(1) foo.h includes features.h, which doesn't exist on OS X. Referring to 
my above patch, this could also be fixed in the Makefile by not 
including foo.h on OS X, but IMHO that's trickier (uname).
(2) The linking was changed so, that ncurses wasn't linked in on OS X 
anymore

BUT I also noted another breakage, which I'm clueless about:
http://buildroot.uclibc.org/lists/buildroot/2007-July/003658.html
I'm using the same config I was with an older version (for example, rev 
18688 worked).

> 
> 
>>to ask, why was packages/config updated? It worked just fine - even on 
>>OS X - before the bump to linux 2.6.21* config system. Were there 
>>features missing from the old version or something?
> 
> 
> The i18n support was basically not working right. Apart from better
> colour-handling (vie the respective env vars, see source) this was about
> the only reason for the update. As to the libintl breakage, please refer
> to several bug-reports in the bugtracker.

Fair enough. I did skim through the libintl reports, but those didn't 
apply on OS X -- or my installation, at least.

-- Heikki Lindholm

[Buildroot] config update

[Bernhard Fischer]

On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 08:27:33PM +0300, Heikki Lindholm wrote:
> Bernhard Fischer kirjoitti:
>> On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 09:23:10AM +0300, Heikki Lindholm wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I just updated my OS X buildroot and, recent changes breaking it, I have 
>> Can you please be more specific as to how it broke?
>
> Well, basically, it was easier to fix than thought, and I posted a patch 
> already:
> http://buildroot.uclibc.org/lists/buildroot/2007-July/003659.html

I'm curious if you need the same patch if you make menuconfig with e.g.
linux-2.6.21.5.
If so, then please fix this upstream first. If not then there must be
something different going on and we need to track that down.

> The two culprits for the breakage are:
> (1) foo.h includes features.h, which doesn't exist on OS X. Referring to my 
> above patch, this could also be fixed in the Makefile by not including 
> foo.h on OS X, but IMHO that's trickier (uname).
> (2) The linking was changed so, that ncurses wasn't linked in on OS X 
> anymore
>
> BUT I also noted another breakage, which I'm clueless about:
> http://buildroot.uclibc.org/lists/buildroot/2007-July/003658.html
> I'm using the same config I was with an older version (for example, rev 
> 18688 worked).

Do you have SYSROOT set in your .config?

You're using 4.1.2 and there was a reason why i only enabled sysroot for
gcc >= 4.2.0 (IIRC sjhill changed this, so you're better off to ask him
why he enabled sysroot support for 4.1.2.. I figure that it worked for
him else he wouldn't have enabled it. Perhaps it was erroneously enabled,
i wouldn't know.)

[Buildroot] config update

[Heikki Lindholm]

Bernhard Fischer kirjoitti:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 08:27:33PM +0300, Heikki Lindholm wrote:
> 
>>Bernhard Fischer kirjoitti:
>>
>>>On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 09:23:10AM +0300, Heikki Lindholm wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I just updated my OS X buildroot and, recent changes breaking it, I have 
>>>
>>>Can you please be more specific as to how it broke?
>>
>>Well, basically, it was easier to fix than thought, and I posted a patch 
>>already:
>>http://buildroot.uclibc.org/lists/buildroot/2007-July/003659.html
> 
> 
> I'm curious if you need the same patch if you make menuconfig with e.g.
> linux-2.6.21.5.

2.6.21* wont' work, but 2.6.22 has fixed the problem with linking. It 
also doesn't have the foo.h problem at all.

> If so, then please fix this upstream first. If not then there must be
> something different going on and we need to track that down.
> 
> 
>>The two culprits for the breakage are:
>>(1) foo.h includes features.h, which doesn't exist on OS X. Referring to my 
>>above patch, this could also be fixed in the Makefile by not including 
>>foo.h on OS X, but IMHO that's trickier (uname).
>>(2) The linking was changed so, that ncurses wasn't linked in on OS X 
>>anymore
>>
>>BUT I also noted another breakage, which I'm clueless about:
>>http://buildroot.uclibc.org/lists/buildroot/2007-July/003658.html
>>I'm using the same config I was with an older version (for example, rev 
>>18688 worked).
> 
> 
> Do you have SYSROOT set in your .config?

I think the whole concept was introduced when I wasn't following 
buildroot development much. The old config file I used doesn't have any 
symbols containing SYSROOT.

> You're using 4.1.2 and there was a reason why i only enabled sysroot for
> gcc >= 4.2.0 (IIRC sjhill changed this, so you're better off to ask him
> why he enabled sysroot support for 4.1.2.. I figure that it worked for
> him else he wouldn't have enabled it. Perhaps it was erroneously enabled,
> i wouldn't know.)

Maybe I'll just give 4.2.0 a shot, if that's the new standard(?)

-- Heikki Lindholm

[Buildroot] config update

[Bernhard Fischer]

On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 08:50:56AM +0300, Heikki Lindholm wrote:
> Bernhard Fischer kirjoitti:

>> I'm curious if you need the same patch if you make menuconfig with e.g.
>> linux-2.6.21.5.
>
> 2.6.21* wont' work, but 2.6.22 has fixed the problem with linking. It also 
> doesn't have the foo.h problem at all.

Earlier today, i touched these curses affair. Perhaps it behaves now?

If not, then please pull the mconf from 2.6.22.x and send a diff for me
to apply

>> You're using 4.1.2 and there was a reason why i only enabled sysroot for
>> gcc >= 4.2.0 (IIRC sjhill changed this, so you're better off to ask him
>> why he enabled sysroot support for 4.1.2.. I figure that it worked for
>> him else he wouldn't have enabled it. Perhaps it was erroneously enabled,
>> i wouldn't know.)
>
> Maybe I'll just give 4.2.0 a shot, if that's the new standard(?)

actually the current stable and supported release is by now 4.2.1