From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: PATCH [0/3]: Simplify the kernel build by removing perl. Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:18:03 +0100 Message-ID: <20090112101803.GB10086@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <200901020207.30359.rob@landley.net> <495FEEAF.5020005@zytor.com> <200901032006.47652.rob@landley.net> <20090104030619.GA21466@linux-sh.org> <1231677939.3517.5.camel@gimli.at.home> <31014a580901111928u586e2246uccf370ff941c8a01@mail.gmail.com> <20090112053552.GA9061@uranus.ravnborg.org> <31014a580901112150x57cd715aj5f42ee19bc28c701@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <31014a580901112150x57cd715aj5f42ee19bc28c701@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-embedded-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Mark A. Miller" Cc: Bernd Petrovitsch , Leon Woestenberg , Paul Mundt , Rob Landley , "H. Peter Anvin" , Embedded Linux mailing list , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 11:50:31PM -0600, Mark A. Miller wrote: > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > >> There are several other packages which are broken for embedded > >> architectures, which I will hopefully attempt to fix by submitting patches > >> upstream. But this is why we should be cautious about including new tools > >> for compiling the kernel. Sam Ravnborg was correct in that a C program to do > >> the work would be the proper way. But by not addressing a currently existing > >> problem with an adequate replacement with something that does not exist > >> currently, seems faulty. > > > > Why are "make headers_install" such a crucial thing for your > > embedded environmnet? > > Sanity check. If the environment cannot replicate itself, then > something has been faulty in the cross-compiling stage, that was used > to propagate a native environment for the target architecture. So you actually build your target toolchain on your target? Sam