From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 19:13:13 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] Refactoring Freescale's iMX software revision levels In-Reply-To: <42565.217.149.209.147.1367582464.squirrel@webmail.internl.net> References: <1367569664-3307-1-git-send-email-h.fijnvandraat@inter.nl.net> <42565.217.149.209.147.1367582464.squirrel@webmail.internl.net> Message-ID: <5183F029.1000907@mind.be> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 03/05/13 14:01, H.Fijnvandraat at inter.nl.net wrote: > Sorry, > > But I have to withdraw these patches. > > Due to the sequence in which the .mk files are included IMX_VERSION_LEVEL > is defined when imx-lib.mk is processed, while it is already needed for > firmware-imx (and gpu-viv-bin-mx6q if it would be introduced) > > Placing it in firmware-imx would do for now, but then no dependencies can > be placed alphabetically before it later. > > It appears we need some other mechanism to rule them all. Ah, yes stupid of me. Normally the order of assignments doesn't matter, but the generic-target contains an 'ifndef $(2)_VERSION'. So the only solution is to collect the imx packages in an imx subdirectory, like qt5. I've told Henk earlier that we try to avoid creating subdirectories in the package directory, but perhaps this is a good reason to do it. What do the others think? Regards, Arnout -- Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F