On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > to allow overriding from the command line? i always use "?=" to > > designate that sort of thing, just to make it clear to anyone > > reading the script. > > right currently the stuff is not complete... The ./tmp dir handling > is missing, therefore the build_base was just an preparation. The > drawback of this approach is that the toolchain isn't shared. It > would be better to split all outputs beside unique toolchains.
the more i look at this, the more complex it could potentially get. first, the "host" tools would appear to be entirely shareable across all target arches, right? i don't see how they'd differ in any way regardless of the target. and toolchains for the same target arch would normally be shareable unless you chose to build them with slightly different build options. that's why i'm thinking that this "splitting" should be based primarily on a user-chosen BUILD_ID, since asking the build process to make that kind of decision automatically is probably just asking too much. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Home page: http://crashcourse.ca Fedora Cookbook: http://crashcourse.ca/wiki/index.php/Fedora_Cookbook ======================================================================== _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org http://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
