From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 21:54:38 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] jq: enable host package In-Reply-To: References: <1445251329-18120-1-git-send-email-patrickdepinguin@gmail.com> <1445251329-18120-2-git-send-email-patrickdepinguin@gmail.com> <20151021223958.5605a589@free-electrons.com> <5627FDD5.8060207@mind.be> <20151021232020.610e4735@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <56293EFE.9050009@mind.be> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 22-10-15 10:22, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Thomas Petazzoni > wrote: >> Arnout, >> >> On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 23:04:21 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: >> >>> I was thinking the same thing when I say the patch, but I don't care enough to >>> really comment on it. It's a bit similar to packages that depend on some host >>> preprocessing tool, like flex. But then of course we just have a dependency and >>> not a Config.in.host. >> >> To me, host packages that are a dependency of some other target >> packages have a real and strong reason to exist. The ones that don't >> should really fall into the "useful for debugging, flashing or >> preparing images" category IMO. >> >>> OTOH, if we accept this, it kind of opens the doors to support almost >>> everything as a host package. But maybe there's nothing wrong with that either. >> >> Opening the door to almost everything as a host package is personally >> something that I'd like to avoid. > > I don't think that we would open the door to 'almost every package' as > host package. For many packages, it makes no sense to have them as > host package in the context of buildroot, say audio/video, > profiling/benchmark, hardware handling, mail, miscellaneous, > networking apps, ... > In fact, I would argue that almost none of the packages we have in > Buildroot make sense as host packages, except those that we already > have, and a few limited categories of tools. In my opinion, one such > category could be config file handling, and host-jq fits into that > category. It's the type of thing one can reasonably need to put > together filestystem images for embedded devices, especially in > environments where many (variants of) devices are being developed. So that basically puts jq into the 'image generation' category for you :-) Note that personally I don't have much of a problem with adding more host packages, I don't think they tend to add much of a maintenance burden. 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: 7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF