[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Add missing sysroot resolution
From: |
Lionel Landwerlin |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Add missing sysroot resolution |
Date: |
Sat, 09 Oct 2010 16:31:02 +0200 |
Le samedi 09 octobre 2010 à 10:55 +0200, Paolo Bonzini a écrit :
> On 10/09/2010 10:51 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > * Paolo Bonzini wrote on Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 10:43:12AM CEST:
> >> I'm applying this patch since it's pretty obvious.
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> > Is this fixing (part) of the reported bug?
>
> Lionel pointed us to the patch, so I assumed it fixed all of it. I
> still haven't built his stuff. It looks really interesting, as does
> OpenEmbedded, and it's really cool that the sysroot feature is already
> getting this much exposure. I was worried that it would remain confined
> in the "unused feature" limbo and would bitrot.
>
> It's also nice because it shows that these people _are_
> autoreconfing/relibtoolizing as part of their build systems. It gives
> me much more confidence on the backwards-compatibility of libtool 2.4!
>
> > Do you know how to expose it, so we can cover it in the testsuite?
>
> Not yet, I'll look into it next week. I need to build Lionel's recipe
> and then distill a testcase.
>
> > For future sysroot patches, feel free to also (or first) commit them to
> > the sysroot branch and merge them to master.
>
> Ok, I was undecided about the status of the sysroot branch.
>
Hi,
Paolo, I'm sorry if I made you though this patch was fixing my problem
(in fact after a quick test, it does not). I just wanted to point it
out, because Openembedded like buildroot, are projects which try to
crosscompile source packages. I though it might be a good start to
investigate the problem.
And yes, I personally prefer to autoreconf/libtoolize packages rather
than patching a generated libtool script :)
Regards,
--
Lionel Landwerlin