On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Mark Hatle <mark.ha...@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.ha...@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.ha...@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 _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
