From: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>
To: Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>
Cc: Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com>,
Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rt-tests: fix dependency on eglibc, clean LDFLAGS passing
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 09:22:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F68AECD.5010805@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120320160928.GB22965@denix.org>
On 03/20/2012 09:09 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 08:33:14AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 03/20/2012 08:28 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 08:01:44AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 03/19/2012 05:22 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>>>> From: Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Replace dependency on eglibc with virtual/libc
>>>>> Pass LDFLAGS to TARGET_CC_ARCH, instead of CFLAGS as Makefile overrides it
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Denys,
>>>>
>>>> Looking through the rt-tests sources I don't see TARGET_CC_ARCH
>>>> anywhere. Have you confirmed that changes made there make their way into
>>>> the actual build?
>>>
>>> Darren,
>>>
>>> TARGET_CC_ARCH is not an rt-tests specific variable, it's used in OE.
>>> Although, TARGET_LDFLAGS might be more appropriate for this purpose,
>>> historically TARGET_CC_ARCH was heavily used to pass distro LDFLAGS to the
>>> app's build process - grepping it would show many such cases in OE-Core and
>>> especially in meta-oe...
>>
>> OK, thanks for the context. Will you be resubmitting with TARGET_LDFLAGS?
>
> Nope, my bad, it's actually the other way around. From bitbake.conf:
>
> export LDFLAGS = "${TARGET_LDFLAGS}"
>
> So, appending to TARGET_CC_ARCH is the simplest way to pass flags, as that's
> embedded into $CC
>
> Another option would have been to call make with -e flag to let environment
> variables override the ones in the Makefile, but that's less controlled...
OK, from the context you've provided, the TARGET_CC_ARCH seems like the
most expedient option. Ultimately a patch to rt-tests to allow users to
provide LDFLAGS seems like the best approach. I can talk to Clark W.
about this.
So you have my ack:
Acked-by: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-20 16:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-20 0:22 [PATCH] rt-tests: fix dependency on eglibc, clean LDFLAGS passing Denys Dmytriyenko
2012-03-20 15:01 ` Darren Hart
2012-03-20 15:11 ` Koen Kooi
2012-04-07 3:34 ` Khem Raj
2012-03-20 15:28 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2012-03-20 15:33 ` Darren Hart
2012-03-20 16:09 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2012-03-20 16:22 ` Darren Hart [this message]
2012-03-20 18:39 ` Darren Hart
2012-03-20 18:59 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2012-03-20 19:03 ` Darren Hart
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=4F68AECD.5010805@linux.intel.com \
--to=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=denis@denix.org \
--cc=denys@ti.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/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