This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Enrico, All, On Thursday 22 March 2007 153, Enrico Weigelt wrote: > > Patch "confivars.diff" > > - TOPDIR is already set in the Makefile, and is used for internal purposes. > hmm, I just can't remember why I introduced this - there was some reason > for changing this ... ;-O Droped, then. > > - IDENT: You're only creating a new variable which is used nowhere. > > What's the purpose for this? > Yes, this is an user-only variable, just to be used within other variables. > This makes configuring bunches of toolchains easier. > I've got many toolchains (at least one per target). For new ones I take the > config from some template and adapt it. Other things, like pathes are using > this variable, so I have to change only this one, to get an new TC. > For example, my installations are all in: /opt/xcompiler/${SYSTEM}/ You've got the TARGET_VENDOR option for this. Dropped. > > Patch "cxa_atexit.diff" > At least we could be some bit more verbose in the description. > I'm not sure if it always has to be enabled on glibc and disabled on > uclibc. glibc has it. uClibc trunk has it. uClibc 0.9.28.x and previous don't. > > Patch "incremental-build.diff" > An "clean" target seems to better to me. "clean" and "distclean" are already there to clean the tools build _for_ crosstool-ng to work (mconf, conf). Maybe "mrproper"? ;-) > What dirs do you mean ? The Build-Dirs ? > I thought they're always removed before starting the build. > If not, we should add it. Hmm. Let me look again... Ah, you only trimmed the PREFIX_DIR removal, sorry. BUILD_DIR is still removed. But from the CT_DoLog you added, you're not sure you're not breaking anything. > The skipping is based on tag files, which are only set after the install > is finished. So an incomplete install would probably leave a damaged > installation, but on next make, the stage will be built again. I've seen, but what if the package installed files it shouldn't have in the first place? I don't feel like I like it now... :-/ Let's get it mature, and we'll incorporate some sort resume behavior... > Yeah, it was an working patch, not cleaned up yet. > (I was some bit under time presure ;-o) :-))) > > Patch "installprefix-label.diff: > Ah, okay, I didn't think of that. I'm used to set the DESTDIR variable when > running "make install" - but we've got no separation between build an install > here. Yep. And INSTALL_DIR will be used ( One day, I swear, I will use it! ;-) ) Dropped. Thanks! Yann E. MORIN. -- .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | | +0/33 662376056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ^ | | --==< °_° >==-- °------------.-------: X AGAINST | /e\ There is no | | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | (*_*) | / \ HTML MAIL | """ conspiracy. | °------------------------------°-------°------------------°--------------------° -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |