Buildroot Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] ngrep: bump to version 1.47
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2018 12:18:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lg66bgin.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e17b869d-0492-f0f9-fd2b-2ab04de0cdca@mind.be> (Arnout Vandecappelle's message of "Tue, 6 Nov 2018 11:31:29 +0100")

>>>>> "Arnout" == Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> writes:

Hi,

 >> > then package{A,B,C} would be built with the system-provided make, and
 >> > then package{D,E,F} would be built with host-make ? Is this really a
 >> > desirable situation ?
 >> 
 >> Well, it sounds better than the breakage we have today.

 >  At first sight, I don't see why it should be a problem to use a different make
 > for different packages. A bit weird, but it really shouldn't affect
 > reproducibility or anything.

Well, it could in case a package behaved differently depending on the
make version (E.G. newer make versions have broken older Makefiles), so
enabling a package X that pulls in host-make suddenly changes something
for the build of package Y - Or the other way around, E.G. package Y
depends on package X which pulls in host-make so we never notice that
package Y needs a newer make version, and then a version bump of Y makes
X optional, ..

But I agree that it is quite unlikely to cause any real issues.


 >> In general, mixing make versions in recursive invocations seems a bit
 >> icky. I guess we could end up with issues if/when we do toplevel
 >> parallel builds as well if the job control tracking differs between
 >> versions.

 >  Ooh, yes, top-level parallel build might break dramatically in such a situation...

 >  Well, let's fix that problem when we get there, right?

Agreed!

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

      reply	other threads:[~2018-11-06 11:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-11-01 13:23 [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] ngrep: bump to version 1.47 Fabrice Fontaine
2018-11-01 13:23 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] ngrep: add libnet optional dependency Fabrice Fontaine
2018-11-03 21:42 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] ngrep: bump to version 1.47 Thomas Petazzoni
2018-11-03 22:01   ` Fabrice Fontaine
2018-11-04 10:19     ` Thomas Petazzoni
2018-11-04 11:04       ` Fabrice Fontaine
2018-11-04 11:28         ` Thomas Petazzoni
2018-11-04 11:34         ` Baruch Siach
2018-11-06  0:14           ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2018-11-06  7:59             ` Thomas Petazzoni
2018-11-06  9:54               ` Peter Korsgaard
2018-11-06 10:31                 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2018-11-06 11:18                   ` Peter Korsgaard [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87lg66bgin.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk \
    --to=peter@korsgaard.com \
    --cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox