[U-Boot] simple buildman usage

[Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>]

On 07/14/2015 05:07 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On 14 July 2015 at 16:39, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 07/14/2015 04:09 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 02:11:25PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 07/14/2015 11:56 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've pushed v2015.07 out to the repository and tarballs should exist
>>>>> soon.
>>>>>
>>>>> This sounds a bit like a broken record, but it's true.  The Kconfig
>>>>> migration and DM work continue moving along.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking over the announcement for v2015.04, I see I said we'd deprecate
>>>>> MAKEALL.  So I've applied http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/383960/
>>>>> right after the tag.  If buildman isn't working for you and your use
>>>>> case, we really need to talk.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The nice thing about MAKEALL was that I could simply grab a source
>>>> tree, and run the following to build in-tree:
>>>>
>>>> CROSS_COMPILE=something ./MAKEALL foo
>>>>
>>>> However, with buildman, some complex config file needed to be set up
>>>> to configure the toolchain (and I could never parse the docs to work
>>>> out how to create it in a new checkout), plus it made copies of the
>>>> source tree which takes ages for me.
>>>>
>>>> Is there an equivalently simple way to invoke buildman that doesn't
>>>> require configuration and copying?
>>>
>>>
>>> For no copying, --in-tree does what you want I think.
>>
>>
>> OK. Making that the default would be useful, or providing a buildman wrapper script in the root directory that always passes this option.
>
> $ buildman seaboard
>
> will build U-Boot for seaboard. It does not copy the git tree. It puts
> the output in ../current, or some other directory of your choosing. I
> think that's pretty convenient.

I'd prefer it to go in . so I don't get clutter outside my working tree.

> For toolchains you can use
>
> $ buildman --fetch-arch arm
>
> to get a default one and set it up ready for use complete with config
> file.

I already have the toolchain I want to use installed, so I'd like a 
simple way to use it.

> But honestly the config file is not that hard to figure out!

Well perhaps if you understand its concepts/semantics, but I've always 
had an extremely hard time grasping it, and at least the last time I 
RTFMd there weren't any examples aimed at "this is how to write a config 
file to just use this binary name in $PATH". Equally, having to edit a 
config file any time I want to switch compilers is a bit annoying.