Hiber: For unused tool chain, I propose to remove them all in edk2/master. They can still be found in previous edk2 release.
After remove obsolete tool chain, we still have more than 10 tool chains. The remaining tool chain be use include syntax for further simplification. So, could you submit BZ for it first? If you would like to contribute patch to support include and simplify tools_def.txt, it will be fine. Thanks Liming >-----Original Message----- >From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-boun...@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of >Hiber He >Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 9:02 AM >To: Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com> >Cc: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kin...@intel.com>; edk2- >de...@lists.01.org; Laszlo Ersek (ler...@redhat.com) <ler...@redhat.com> >Subject: Re: [edk2] [RFC] Remove unused tool chain configuration in >BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template > >Hello, > > >I think it's better to separate different toolchains in different files and use >"include" to include them. This can significantly reduce the difficulty of >maintenance and anyone who still wants/has to use older toolchains can have >a chance to follow the edk2-master. > > >Old toolchains can be marked as obsolete and deprecated, and be removed >after the change. The person who still want to use it is responsible for >maintaining and fixing bugs he found from then on. > > >This can aslo make it easier to add personal changes and future toolchains. >The current "tools_def.template" is too huge and complicated. > > >I remember that someone should have suggested it before. > > >Best Regards, >Hiber >On 12/10/2018 20:38, Gao, Liming wrote: >Leif: > Thanks for your suggestion. I will work out the patch set serials to remove >those tool chains. I don't remember the usage model of UNIXGCC. II will wait >for Rebecca response. > >Thanks >Liming >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Leif Lindholm [mailto:leif.lindh...@linaro.org] >> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2018 7:57 PM >> To: Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com> >> Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Laszlo Ersek (ler...@redhat.com) ><ler...@redhat.com>; af...@apple.com; Kinney, Michael D >> <michael.d.kin...@intel.com>; Rebecca Cran <rebe...@bluestop.org> >> Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove unused tool chain configuration in >BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template >> >> On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 02:42:35PM +0000, Gao, Liming wrote: >> > Hi, all >> > tools_def.template includes all tool chains. Some are not used any >> > more. And, there is no verification for them. So, I propose to >> > remove them. They are VS2003, VS2005, VS2008, VS2010, DDK3790, >> > UNIXGCC, GCC44, GCC45, GCC46, GCC47, ELFGCC, CYGGCC, ICC, ICC11, >> > MYTOOLS. If you still use some one of them, please let me know. >> >> This sounds good to me. >> >> However, may I suggest splitting this up into several patches, such >> that if we need to revert one of the deletions, we would not need to >> reinstate all of them. >> >> I would propose: >> - One patch for VS20nn >> - One patch for GCCnn >> - One patch for UNIXGCC, ELFGCC, CYGGCC >> >> I can't really judge what a suitable mashup/split between DDK3790, >> ICC, ICC11, and MYTOOLS would be. >> >> On a sidenote, I think Rebecca said at least FreeBSD were using >> UNIXGCC(?) since the plain GCC toolchain profiles did not support >> cross compiling. I am pretty sure that is not accurate these days - >> did you look into that after the community call? >> >> Regards. >> >> Leif >_______________________________________________ >edk2-devel mailing list >edk2-devel@lists.01.org >https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel >_______________________________________________ >edk2-devel mailing list >edk2-devel@lists.01.org >https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
