<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 04.04.2009 11:10 Uhr, Peter Stuge wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:20090404091017.9934.qmail@stuge.se" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Patrick Georgi wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Is it too much for us to ask that the cbfs tool is built and
installed into the build system? I think that would be ok.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">"into the build system"?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
"on the build system" then.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">With this patch, it's built in util/romtools and then "installed"
into the coreboot-build/*/ directories.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I meant build the tool, then install to /usr/local/bin
I like that for romcc as well.
</pre>
</blockquote>
This -- imho -- makes little sense for a tool that roughly takes about
a second to compile and serves no other purpose than being a build
requirement for coreboot. It would require us to do version checks of
the utilities, maintain feature lists of working versions, etc. What a
nightmare. Why would we even consider this? Then where would we look
for the binaries? /usr/local/bin? /opt/coreboot/bin on non-linux
systems? What about Darwin? What about Windows? I really don't think we
want to care.<br>
<br>
Besides, this discussion has nothing to do with the bug fixed by
Patrick's patch.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20090404091017.9934.qmail@stuge.se" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">If that fails, I think it's ok to at least build each of them in
their util/ directory and run them there.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
We ought to keep our source tree clean and only put objects and
binaries to target/.../ but that's as far as we should go.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20090404091017.9934.qmail@stuge.se" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">It would be trivial if we did not insist on build directories, but I
don't believe they will go away.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I suppose you meant it is trivial if we use build directories and build
everything in there?<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20090404091017.9934.qmail@stuge.se" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">At any rate, isn't it actually very easy to build all neccessary
tools in a common place and then depend on these in each board?
That way they would only be built once.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Not sure if I get right what you are suggesting. The build tools romcc
and romfs are only built once per image.<br>
Optimizing 1s per image/target by introducing a whole bunch of new
problems and dependencies is an incredibly bad idea.<br>
<br>
Stefan<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br.
Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@coresystems.de">info@coresystems.de</a> • <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.coresystems.de/">http://www.coresystems.de/</a>
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Freiburg • HRB 7656
Geschäftsführer: Stefan Reinauer • Ust-IdNr.: DE245674866
</pre>
</body>
</html>