[OE-core] [PATCH 1/6] gcc: Use alternatives for the *-symlinks packages.

[Otavio Salvador]

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Mark Hatle <mark.hatle at windriver.com> wrote:
> On 11/12/13, 8:24 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Mark Hatle <mark.hatle at windriver.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The various gcc related symlinks should be provided as alternatives
>>> instead
>>> of hard coded symlinks.  This will permit multiple toolchains on a
>>> system.
>>>
>>> Multiple toolchains could come from multilib configurations or
>>> alternative
>>> open source or commerical sources.
>>>
>>> Note, gccbug was skipped since it doesn't seem to be generated anymore.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle at windriver.com>
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't be better to squash patches 1 and 2 so it makes a real 'logic
>> change'? You add code to remove in patch 2, I think the end patch
>> would be easier to review, no?
>>
>
> It was done this way to match how binutils was implemented.  These are
> actually two logically separate patches.  The first switches from hard coded
> symlinks to using update-alternatives.  The second patch says that a
> separate -symlinks package is no longer needed.
>
> See binutils:
>
> 1395aefcaeac94dd0e6ed3a718b7e58dd43b355e
> 24093e26f246f222c385dc37a2f8cf8b0f183175
>
> (The second of the patches can be reverted -- if ever needed -- and the
> update alternatives functionality will still work properly.)

Ok; you got a point :-)

Agreed.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750