From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luca Ceresoli Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 23:26:18 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] uboot-tools: Allow users to use uboot's sources In-Reply-To: <52E69898.2080805@mind.be> References: <1390696553-4163-1-git-send-email-maxime.hadjinlian@gmail.com> <52E530D5.20405@lucaceresoli.net> <52E5816F.9080102@lucaceresoli.net> <52E69898.2080805@mind.be> Message-ID: <52E6DD0A.90601@lucaceresoli.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi Arnout, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > On 26/01/14 22:43, Luca Ceresoli wrote: >> Going a step ahead, to be more uniform with these packages, you may use >> a choice construct to allow choosing between two alternatives. >> Example (modified version of the code in barebox.mk): >> >> choice >> prompt "version" >> help >> Select the specific uboot-tools version you want to use >> >> config BR2_PACKAGE_UBOOT_TOOLS_LATEST_VERSION >> bool "Use a recent upstream version" >> >> config BR2_PACKAGE_UBOOT_TOOLS_USE_UBOOT_VERSION >> bool "Use the same sources of the uboot package" >> >> endchoice > > Actually, I don't even see the need to ask the user anything. If we > are building U-Boot, I don't see why we would ever want to use the > U-Boot tools from upstream - that just adds a risk of incompatibility > between the two. Smart observation. I can provide no counterexample. In all my use cases it would be either better or equivalent than the current behavior. > > So I would propose to remove the BR2_PACKAGE_UBOOT_TOOLS_UBOOT_SOURCE > option, and instead make it conditional on BR2_TARGET_UBOOT. That would be fine for me, but how about backward compatibility? This would potentially break some existing projects, so it should appear in the Legacy menu, I guess. -- Luca