Linux-mtd Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin Pluskal <mpluskal@suse.cz>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
	David Oberhollenzer <david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at>
Cc: otavio@debian.org,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>,
	 computersforpeace@gmail.com,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	 riku.voipio@linaro.org, pascal.bleser@opensuse.org,
	gustavo@zacarias.com.ar
Subject: Re: mtd-utils: Swtich to autotools based build system
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 11:19:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1469783966.24141.8.camel@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <579A737A.6090308@nod.at>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Thu, 2016-07-28 at 23:04 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Am 25.07.2016 um 17:02 schrieb David Oberhollenzer:
> > 
> > This patch series is based on Richards RFC to replace the hand
> > written Makefiles with an autoconf/automake based build system
> > to gain all the advantages of having an _actual_ build system
> > that is high level, widely used, well known and mature/stable.
> > 
> > Switching to the GNU buildsystem should make it a lot easier for
> > people to [cross] compile the mtd-utils and integrating them into
> > existing, automated [cross] build toolchains, as the autotools are
> > very widely used/known, effectively representing a pseudo-standard
> > that people are familiar with and that a lot of tools have been
> > adapted to.
> > 
> > The GNU build system also had a few more decades time and a _lot_
> > more testing to mature in regards to cross compilation setups and
> > toolchains than the previous mtd-utils build system that would have
> > to be further supported and maintained in its entirety.
> > 
> > The proposed autotools based build system should also be easier to
> > maintain than a hurdle of makefiles. The automake files are more
> > high level and only contain a list of input files for each program.
> > Generating the makefiles with precise dependencies and build steps
> > is done by the build system.
> > 
> > Furthermore, files like the test scripts can fairly easily be
> > processed with autoconf at compile time to (for instance) replace
> > file locations with the actual path where a program is configured
> > to be installed.
> 
> Let's ask also package maintainers for their opinion.
> They have to (cross)build and package mtd-utils. :-)
> 
> You can find the whole series on:
> https://github.com/sigma-star/mtd-utils.git autoconf_25072016
> 
> Thanks,
> //richard
> 
Hello

definitely autotools - issue with custom makefiles is that they often
ignore conventions, when trying to enforce distribution specific things
one has to go through them, in case of mtd-utils for openSUSE [1], to
use distribution specific flags and have verbose build following has to
be done:
make CC="cc %{optflags}" V=1

Cheers

Martin

1. https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/openSUSE:Factory/mtd-ut
ils/mtd-utils.spec?expand=1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=0rQu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-07-29  9:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-25 15:02 mtd-utils: Swtich to autotools based build system David Oberhollenzer
2016-07-25 15:02 ` [PATCH 1/5] Change build system to autotools David Oberhollenzer
2016-07-25 15:02 ` [PATCH 2/5] Integrate tests into autotools build system David Oberhollenzer
2016-07-25 15:02 ` [PATCH 3/5] Fix paths in .gitignore and add autotools generated files David Oberhollenzer
2016-07-25 15:02 ` [PATCH 4/5] Unify version string printing David Oberhollenzer
2016-07-25 15:02 ` [PATCH 5/5] Integrate/update make_a_release script David Oberhollenzer
2016-07-28 21:04 ` mtd-utils: Swtich to autotools based build system Richard Weinberger
2016-07-28 21:18   ` Thomas Petazzoni
2016-07-29  9:19   ` Martin Pluskal [this message]
2016-08-01 12:14     ` Riku Voipio
2016-08-01 13:05   ` Otavio Salvador
2016-08-01 14:55   ` David Oberhollenzer

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=1469783966.24141.8.camel@suse.cz \
    --to=mpluskal@suse.cz \
    --cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
    --cc=david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=gustavo@zacarias.com.ar \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=otavio@debian.org \
    --cc=pascal.bleser@opensuse.org \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=riku.voipio@linaro.org \
    --cc=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
    /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