Re: [PATCH] gcc-cross: Explicitly depend on linux-libc-headers

[Phil Blundell <philb@gnu.org>]

On Thu, 2012-11-22 at 22:02 +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-11-22 at 21:50 +0000, Phil Blundell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-11-22 at 21:36 +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > -DEPENDS = "virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}binutils virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}libc-for-gcc ${NATIVEDEPS}"
> > > +DEPENDS = "virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}binutils virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}libc-for-gcc linux-libc-headers ${NATIVEDEPS}"
> > 
> > gcc-cross isn't particularly specific to linux targets and ideally we
> > don't want to be adding more linuxisms to the recipe.  It is,
> > admittedly, not entirely obvious how we could conveniently get that
> > dependency added only for linux targets (since I don't think there's any
> > existing OVERRIDE that's helpful here) but perhaps we should find a way
> > to address that problem rather than just sticking it in unconditionally.
> 
> virtual/${TARGET_OS}-headers with a suitable provider entry?

I think a better approach would be to use a python fragment which
appends linux-libc-headers if ${TARGET_OS} starts with "linux".  Your
suggestion would work as well but it seems a bit ugly, and would still
be slightly annoying for targets where no such headers are required.

> I was assuming someone who cares about non-linux wouldn't find this
> particularly hard to deal with...

Well, indeed, but equally it doesn't seem especially polite to introduce
gratuitous target-specific bits into core recipes on the assumption that
someone else will run around after you cleaning them up.  If I was to
start sending patches for gcc which worked for my employer's favourite
target but broke everything else then you would presumably reject them,
and rightly so.

p.