[Buildroot] [PATCH] tslib: speed up the build by skipping autoreconf

[Buildroot] [PATCH] tslib: speed up the build by skipping autoreconf

[Martin Kepplinger]

Signed-off-by: Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@ginzinger.com>
---
hi,

this is more of a question what buildroot's stand is on this. Can there be
benefit from doing autoreconf in a real tarball release? In case there is
no patch against the relevant build sources, I guess not, but you'll know
better.

thanks
                       martin


 package/tslib/tslib.mk | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/package/tslib/tslib.mk b/package/tslib/tslib.mk
index e0f307a..27d960d 100644
--- a/package/tslib/tslib.mk
+++ b/package/tslib/tslib.mk
@@ -10,7 +10,6 @@ TSLIB_SOURCE = tslib-$(TSLIB_VERSION).tar.xz
 TSLIB_LICENSE = GPL, LGPL
 TSLIB_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING
 
-TSLIB_AUTORECONF = YES
 TSLIB_INSTALL_STAGING = YES
 TSLIB_INSTALL_STAGING_OPTS = DESTDIR=$(STAGING_DIR) LDFLAGS=-L$(STAGING_DIR)/usr/lib install
 
-- 
2.1.4

[Buildroot] [PATCH] tslib: speed up the build by skipping autoreconf

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Martin" == Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@ginzinger.com> writes:

 > Signed-off-by: Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@ginzinger.com>
 > ---
 > hi,

 > this is more of a question what buildroot's stand is on this. Can there be
 > benefit from doing autoreconf in a real tarball release? In case there is
 > no patch against the relevant build sources, I guess not, but you'll know
 > better.

Committed, thanks.

In Buildroot we only do autoreconf if it is needed, E.G. if we have a
patch modifying one of the auto* files (configure.ac, Makefile.am,
..). Apparently the AUTORECONF = YES line was not removed from tslib.mk
when such patches were removed in a version bump.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard