Il 25/06/2014 20:52, Jordan Justen ha scritto:
>> > The patches make it possible to separately package tools in /usr
>> > and use them compile EDK2.
> How are you envisioning the packaging to work? I think that installing
> all the edk2 BaseTools executables in /usr/bin would be silly.
Why? That's not very different from binutils. Users of rpm or deb
expect everything to be in their PATH. There are makefiles that expect
to use EfiRom without modifying their PATH, for example.
If it were installed in /opt/edk2, of course, it would be different.
Fedora currently installs binaries in /usr/bin (just a wrapper for the
Python tools), and the rest in /usr/share/edk2 which is structured like
this:
/usr/share/edk2
BuildEnv
Conf/
*.template etc.
Scripts/
gcc4.4-ld-script
Source/
Python/
...
you can then do
export EDK_TOOLS_PATH=/usr/share/edk2
source edksetup.sh
and everything just works.
> I have two ideas:
> 1. /usr/bin/edk2-build would be a script that would add
> /usr/lib/edk2-buildtools/bin to the PATH and run
> /usr/lib/edk2-buildtools/bin/build
> 2. Same as 1, except use 'edk2' for the command name, and 'build' as
> the first parameter. (Ie, use sub-commands like svn/git)
That would break the aforementioned makefiles that use EfiRom.
> I also think it might be convenient if the templates in
> /usr/lib/edk2-buildtools/Conf were used for Conf files if
> $WORKSPACE/Conf is empty.
Yes, that already happens when you source edksetup.sh.
Paolo
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse
Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition
Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows
Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
