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
prev parent 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