From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48610) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3hgB-0000c0-OF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 08:38:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3hg7-0004bF-R7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 08:38:19 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-x22f.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::22f]:54379) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3hg7-0004aj-JB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 08:38:15 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id r191so9930296wmg.4 for ; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 05:38:15 -0700 (PDT) References: <20180228180215.25470-1-wei@redhat.com> <20180228180215.25470-2-wei@redhat.com> <20180305110122.GD3131@work-vm> <20180305133654.7aokepvzcmxhzk4q@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> <20180305135244.GJ3131@work-vm> <868c6039-35fb-16cb-67bb-39cee11e8118@redhat.com> <28739cac-ad18-a46d-23b0-fef9458da75e@redhat.com> From: Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= In-reply-to: <28739cac-ad18-a46d-23b0-fef9458da75e@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 13:38:12 +0100 Message-ID: <87fu4bcfkb.fsf@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V7 1/4] rules: Move cross compilation auto detection functions to rules.mak List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Laurent Vivier Cc: Wei Huang , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Andrew Jones , peter.maydell@linaro.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, quintela@redhat.com Laurent Vivier writes: > On 05/03/2018 18:59, Wei Huang wrote: > ... >> >> SLO build actually is OK if we don't move the cross-compile stuff to the >> generic rules.mak. >> >> So this cross-compile approach has lots of objection (unclean, broken >> rom build etc.). A complete solution will make this patchset bloated, >> which is diverted away from original purpose of migration-test. >> >> Dave & Drew: will the following be acceptable? >> >> 1. Still use Makefile for .s->.h compilation >> 2. In Makefile, we don't support cross-compilation. This avoids >> duplicating the cross-compile detection code at all. Whoever really >> wants to re-generate .h file must be avid programmers. They can either >> find a native machine or fix Makefile themselves. >> 3. The cross-compile re-factoring will become a separate patchset. In >> that patchset, both ROM and migration-test Makefiles will be changed to >> support cross compilation. >> >> Thoughts? > > I agree with Peter: I think an improvement would be to detect/configure > cross-compilers at the configure level, not in the Makefile. I'm going to have a go at this now for docker and host installed cross-compilers. > > thanks, > Laurent -- Alex Benn=C3=A9e