From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 18:30:27 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/3] infra: add gettextize run in AUTORECONF In-Reply-To: <20140714130104.480ab4cf@free-electrons.com> References: <1405186024-8170-1-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> <1405186024-8170-2-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> <20140714130104.480ab4cf@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <53C405A3.3080301@mind.be> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 14/07/14 13:01, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Dear Gustavo Zacarias, > > On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 14:27:03 -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote: > >> It adds some extra build time when doing autoreconf passes but the alternative >> would require a new GETTEXTIZE option and package audit which could take some >> time to get resolved. > > I believe I would actually prefer a separate GETTEXTIZE option, I'm a > little bit worried about the extra build time. What do others think? I agree with Gustavo that the extra 2 seconds of gettextize are anyway dwarfed by the 15 seconds for autoreconf (on my I/O-bound laptop). So I wouldn't bother with an extra option. My worry is more that gettextize could fail, like autoreconf sometimes does. Though I think the risk is lower for gettextize. 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