From: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>
To: <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: Secondary Toolchain
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 13:38:43 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <506DD7B3.3010909@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHUNapRUMPFYdV8YPjAz2Fw2NgvsXjXJ5gjUo358aRtA3mjdhg@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/4/12 1:15 PM, Trevor Woerner wrote:
> I'm curious to know if anyone (I certainly wouldn't be able to!) can
> take a guess whether this would "play nicely" with external
> toolchains?
>
> In other words, if some recipe is already PROVIDES'ing
> virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}gcc etc would the correct toolchain be used
> for the special packages needing the secondary toolchain?
My expectations is that any existing dependency set will be managed and
maintained by the existing primary toolchain, unless a given recipe has a
specific dependency on a secondary toolchain item.
I.e. the example above will -always- be the primary toolchain from a dependency
resolution standpoint..
If the recipe adds "virtual/icc", then something, such as icc, needs to exist to
provide that.
Does this seem like a reasonable behavior and expectation? (The thing to
remember is this secondary toolchain is just that.. an alternative to the
primary for specific users and NOT general purpose....)
--Mark
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-04 18:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-04 18:02 RFC: Secondary Toolchain Mark Hatle
2012-10-04 18:15 ` Trevor Woerner
2012-10-04 18:38 ` Mark Hatle [this message]
2012-10-04 19:03 ` McClintock Matthew-B29882
2012-10-04 20:27 ` Mark Hatle
2012-10-04 20:36 ` Khem Raj
2012-10-04 21:00 ` Mark Hatle
2012-10-04 21:02 ` Khem Raj
2012-10-04 21:16 ` Phil Blundell
2012-10-04 21:31 ` Mark Hatle
2012-11-13 23:37 ` RFC: Secondary Toolchain -- Followup Mark Hatle
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=506DD7B3.3010909@windriver.com \
--to=mark.hatle@windriver.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