From: "Jérôme Pouiller" <jezz@sysmic.org>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] Target rebuilding
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 10:43:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4979126.r9TnxBzdAQ@sagittae> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50F7FC52.7040608@relinux.de>
Hello Stephan,
On Thursday 17 January 2013 14:27:46 Stephan Hoffmann wrote:
> Am 17.01.2013 12:04, schrieb J?r?me Pouiller:
> > It is handy to do tests directly in target/. But after some time, it is
> > necessary to make a new fresh target/ directory.
>
> This topic comes up from time to time. Once upon a time I sent a patch
> to introduce a "make target-clean" (
> http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2012-October/060484.html )
> , but it does not seem that this feature can be implemented in a
> reliable way, especially when libraries are removed from .config.
I am agreee with this thread. Since we cannot prove correctness it is not a
good idea to give a target to this.
Nevertheless, in 90% of cases, I know I can rebuild target/ without recompile
everything and this "hack" allow to divide by 500 time to rebuild target/. I
would like to make this procedure easier to learn for users.
I asked myself if it was not possible to make this procedure more intuitive
without breaking everything. That why I suggest these small changes. Each of
them can be done independently.
IMHO these changes would make process more coherent and would bring a better
usage of Buildroot. But I understand it is subjective.
> So for now I fear we have to stick to "make clean && make" if we want to
> clean up our file system.
Sure. But, if it is the only answer I give, my interlocutor will reply me that
Buildroot is painful (which make me angry for all rest of the day).
> > The current procedure to do
> >
> > this is:
> >
> > * remove build/.root (or remove target/ if you want to throw all your
> > work)
>
> What's the use in removing the stamp file and keeping the target
> directory? I think the whole proccedure is meant to chean up the target
> file system, isn't it?
Right. It was mainly to point out "build/.root" is not an intuitive path.
[...]
> > I suggest following changes:
> > 1. Move build/.root to stamps/. Since it is hidden, many user forget this
> > file exist.
> >
> > 2. All stamps files are in subdirectories of build/. I suggest to move
> > stamps/ to build/stamps/
> >
> > 3. Buildroot toolchain should create a stamp files to be uniform with
> > other toolchains. In add, target/lib/libc.so.0 never exists when
> > PREFER_STATIC_LIB is enable.
> >
> > 4. To be consistent stamps/*-toolchain-installed may be renamed
> > stamps/.stamp_target_installed or stamps/.stamp_toolchain_target_installed
> > or toolchain/.stamp_target_installed. We may add a README file to explain
> > what is purpose of this apparently empty directory.
> >
> > 5. stamps/ext-toolchain-installed currently copy libc in staging/ and in
> > target/. It may be splited in two rules: stamps/ext-toolchain-target-
> > installed and stamps/ext-toolchain-staging-installed.
[...]
Regards,
--
J?r?me Pouiller
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-18 9:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-17 11:04 [Buildroot] Target rebuilding Jérôme Pouiller
2013-01-17 13:27 ` Stephan Hoffmann
2013-01-18 9:43 ` Jérôme Pouiller [this message]
2013-01-19 16:32 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-05-14 14:30 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH] Standardisation of $(BUILD)/.root name Jérôme Pouiller
2013-05-14 15:07 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-05-14 15:27 ` Jérôme Pouiller
2013-05-14 22:23 ` Yann E. MORIN
2013-05-15 6:19 ` Jérôme Pouiller
2013-05-15 6:27 ` Jérôme Pouiller
2013-05-15 21:01 ` Yann E. MORIN
2013-05-15 20:59 ` Yann E. MORIN
2013-05-14 21:52 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-05-14 22:06 ` Yann E. MORIN
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=4979126.r9TnxBzdAQ@sagittae \
--to=jezz@sysmic.org \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/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