From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Fainelli Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 10:10:22 -0700 Subject: [Buildroot] [RFC 0/2] Add support for specifying a custom kernel directory In-Reply-To: <20171029073312.GB2899@scaer> References: <1509242782-14524-1-git-send-email-f.fainelli@gmail.com> <20171029073312.GB2899@scaer> Message-ID: <5835fdce-74f9-eae0-6f2b-d851f08a408a@gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi, On 10/29/2017 12:33 AM, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Florian, All, > > On 2017-10-28 19:06 -0700, Florian Fainelli spake thusly: >> This series allows specifying a custom kernel directory which could be an >> existing git tree. This is particularly useful when doing kernel development >> and having an existing git checkout where development is happening. > > As I replied to the patch itself: this is already covered by the > opverride-srcdir mechanism, so I've marked this series as rejected in > our patchwork. > >> Ideally, I would like to avoid doing the rsync operation involved with the "local" method >> and instead just have a symbolic link from /path/to/kernel -> output/build/linux. > > The first rsync may take a few seconds, true, but subs=equent ones will > be much faster if all you do is change a few files, especially on a hot > directory, so there is not much gain to have with a local symlink. It is more about not duplicating sources unnecessarily. If you have all developers on your system do the same thing, you would end-up with a lot of copies of the same files, and if your filesystem does not already offer de-duplication, that becomes additional space used. The copy aspect is also potentially an issue since Linux kernel sources are significant enough this can become a concern over time. > > OTOH, I am currently working on out-of-tree per-pacakge build, which > will (eventually) allow us to make use of the O= mechanism to build the > kernel out-of-tree, and get rid of the rsync altogether. Don't hold your > breath, though. ;-) OK, that's good to hear. Feel free to CC when you get there and I will happily try to test that too. Thanks! -- Florian