From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 01:07:18 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v7 05/18] core: make staging *-config scripts relocatable In-Reply-To: <20160309232438.GG5634@free.fr> References: <1457564339-27294-1-git-send-email-s.martin49@gmail.com> <1457564339-27294-6-git-send-email-s.martin49@gmail.com> <20160309232438.GG5634@free.fr> Message-ID: <56E0BAB6.1030707@mind.be> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 03/10/16 00:24, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Samuel, All, > > On 2016-03-09 23:58 +0100, Samuel Martin spake thusly: >> This change adjusts the _CONFIG_SCRIPTS hook to set add {exec_,}prefix computed >> relatively to the script location. >> >> This patch hook only fixes *-config scripts located in the staging area, >> the target ones are already removed. A follow-up change will fix those >> from the HOST_DIR location. >> >> Signed-off-by: Samuel Martin >> >> --- >> changes v6->v7: >> - none >> >> changes v5->v6: >> - new patch >> --- >> package/pkg-generic.mk | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/package/pkg-generic.mk b/package/pkg-generic.mk >> index 3904c09..ffa21ee 100644 >> --- a/package/pkg-generic.mk >> +++ b/package/pkg-generic.mk >> @@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ $(BUILD_DIR)/%/.stamp_staging_installed: >> $(call MESSAGE,"Fixing package configuration files") ;\ >> $(SED) "s,$(BASE_DIR), at BASE_DIR@,g" \ >> -e "s,$(STAGING_DIR), at STAGING_DIR@,g" \ >> - -e "s,^\(exec_\)\?prefix=.*,\1prefix=@STAGING_DIR@/usr,g" \ >> + -e "s,^\(exec_\)\?prefix=.*,\1prefix=\`dirname \$$0\`/../../usr,g" \ > > I'd prefer we use the $() form when calling subshells: > > -e "s,^\(exec_\)\?prefix=.*,\1prefix=$$(dirname \$$0)/../../usr,g" ^ missing \ here > > I know we switched to using `` in some locations, but that was because > those locations may be called with various levels of $(eval), and that > would cause $$() to be evaluated too early in some situations. But we like things to be consistent, so I'd stick to `. OTOH, this particular bit is not going to be expanded by the shell, but is actually inserted into the script. So perhaps we don't _want_ to be consistent here. But like Yann says, it's not so important. Regards, Arnout > > However, here we are in a real rule, so there's no such ambiguity. > > But I won't block it just for that. I you agree with my proposed change, > that's OK; if you don't, that's OK too: > > Reviewed-by: "Yann E. MORIN" > > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > >> -e "s,-I/usr/,-I at STAGING_DIR@/usr/,g" \ >> -e "s,-L/usr/,-L at STAGING_DIR@/usr/,g" \ >> -e "s, at STAGING_DIR@,$(STAGING_DIR),g" \ >> -- >> 2.7.2 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> buildroot mailing list >> buildroot at busybox.net >> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot > -- 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