Buildroot Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] Design issue with the out-of-tree support
Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 18:50:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51A38EEE.7000406@mind.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130523131251.2ffc509f@skate>

On 23/05/13 13:12, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
>   * Make autoreconf a step on its own, instead of being either a
>     pre-patch hook or a post-patch hook. This may also allow to do
>     something like a 'make <pkg>-reautoreconf' target, like we have
>     'make <pkg>-reconfigure' and 'make <pkg>-rebuild'. Then, this
>     autoreconf step would be the one that has:
>
>     $(1)-autoreconf: $$($(2)_DEPENDENCIES)
>
>     which would work ok, since the RTAI/Linux integration depends on
>     rtai-patch, which wouldn't pull the dependencies of the rtai package.
>
>     However, I am not yet sure how to insert this step into the package
>     logic, since this step is specific to autotools package, and
>     therefore would normally not belong to the pkg-generic.mk
>     infrastructure.

  I haven't read the thread in detail or thought about it very carefully, 
but some time ago I already thought that this would be better.

  It is not necessarily limited to autoreconf. For example, the way that 
xenomai patches the linux sources fits in this as well (xenomai could add 
to LINUX_POST_AUTORECONF_HOOKS).

  So I would propose to add another step to the generic infrastructure. I 
would call it the PREPARE step, and make it a full step with CMDS and HOOKS.

  The question is whether the OVERRIDE_SRCDIR infrastructure should apply 
this step or not. Conceptually, it shouldn't, but that means that users 
of OVERRIDE_SRCDIR for packages that need an autoreconf would need to do 
the autoreconf manually. Which is probably for the best anyway, but which 
is a change compared to current behaviour.

  BTW the libtool fixup should probably be done in this prepare step as 
well. But again, I haven't thought this through in detail.

  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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-05-27 16:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-05-23 11:12 [Buildroot] Design issue with the out-of-tree support Thomas Petazzoni
2013-05-23 12:43 ` Will Wagner
2013-05-23 12:53   ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-05-23 14:49     ` Markos Chandras
2013-05-23 18:12 ` Yann E. MORIN
2013-05-27 16:50 ` Arnout Vandecappelle [this message]
2013-05-27 19:12   ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-05-27 19:44     ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-05-27 19:53       ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-05-28 19:26         ` Arnout Vandecappelle

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=51A38EEE.7000406@mind.be \
    --to=arnout@mind.be \
    --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