From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vivien Didelot Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:12:30 -0400 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 3/4] linux-headers: rename _AS_KERNEL to _FROM_KERNEL In-Reply-To: <20160419231358.61e8f0c6@free-electrons.com> References: <1461099155-30702-1-git-send-email-vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> <1461099155-30702-4-git-send-email-vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> <20160419231358.61e8f0c6@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <8760vds0xd.fsf@ketchup.mtl.sfl> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi Thomas, Thomas Petazzoni writes: >> BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_AS_KERNEL is confusing when making the choice between >> downloading the headers from an independent kernel source, and using the >> headers found in the kernel built by Buildroot. >> >> Rename it to BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_FROM_KERNEL. >> >> In the meantime, document this distinction between the two choices. >> >> Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot > > I tend to disagree here. The headers are not "from" the kernel, since > in practice, we download the kernel source code twice and extract it > twice. So the "as kernel" really seem better. It could be "like kernel" > as well, but "from kernel" seems wrong. So with BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_AS_KERNEL, the kernel source tree to extract the headers from is the same site as the Linux kernel source. With !BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_AS_KERNEL, the kernel source is downloaded from kernel.org (or a mirror). Correct? If yes, BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_SAME_SOURCE or BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_SAME_SITE seem clearer to me. > However, I'm all for improving the help texts to make this clearer. Thanks, Vivien