[oe] [PATCH 0/4][RFC] Remove CROSS_DIR, install cross-packages into native sysroot

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/7/23 Richard Purdie <rpurdie at rpsys.net>

> On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 10:11 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On 23-07-10 10:02, Phil Blundell wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 09:25 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> > >> There is a BIG problem with these patches, they break multimachine
> builds.
> > >>
> > >> The previous situation had:
> > >>
> > >> cross/armv7a-angstrom-foo/usr/bin/
> > >> cross/armv5te-angstrom-foo/usr/bin/
> > >> etc
> > >>
> > >> The new situation has:
> > >>
> > >> x86_64-linux/usr/bin
> > >>
> > >> So all the toolchains get dropped into the *same* directory, which
> > >> breaks horribly.
> > >
> > > Which are the actual binaries that collide?  I would have thought that
> > > everything which gets installed into the cross bindir ought to be
> > > prefixed with TARGET_SYS (i.e. usr/bin/armv7a-angstrom-linux-gcc, etc).
> >
> > It's all 'arm-angstrom-foo', I was just about to make the suggestion to
> > change it to 'armv7a-angstrom-foo' :)
>
> I've just been talking to Koen about this. When building for armv7a,
> TARGET_ARCH which goes into TARGET_PREFIX and TARGET_SYS is "arm".
>
> I suspect if we change TARGET_ARCH to be armv7a, nasty things will
> happen but I could be wrong.
>

I've been pondering if TARGET_ARCH should be the real arch (like armv7a) and
whether adjacent to that there should be a TARGET_ARCH_FAMILY or so.

Changing TARGET_ARCH to armv7a without other changes definitely is going to
break things.
There are 110 .bb files that reference TARGET_ARCH

the last two lines of the grep read:
xqt2/xqt2_20060509.bb:    if [ ${TARGET_ARCH} == "arm" ]; then
xqt/xqt_0.0.9.bb:    if [ ${TARGET_ARCH} == "arm" ]; then
so these are definitely not going to fly

for some other of the 110 recipes the change is harmless (e.g. because they
compare to "mips" in gcc-common.inc)
for most others I cannot judge this, e.g. because the value is passed to
configure.

unrelated side note:
while grepping I noticed the existence of dirs like linux-uml and linux-atm.
These contain kernel recipes.
Shouldn't these be in linux recipes dir? (or alternately shouldn't there be
also things like linux-omap and linux-nios2).

frans


> If that doesn't help which I suspect it won't, my gut instinct is to add
> a architecture specific directory under bin for the cross bits. This
> could be as simple as changing bindir in cross.bbclass.
>
> > I don't know if that solves the binutils-cross problem[1], though.
> >
> > Koen
> >
> > [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/34685
>
> Is that libiberty.a file actually useful or could we just stop
> binutils-cross installing it?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>