On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 07:59 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > On Aug 9, 2011, at 11:00 PM, Lu, Lianhao wrote: > > > Richard Purdie wrote on 2011-08-10: > >> If we don't do this, the SDK target sysroot is named generically even > >> when it contains package architecture specific optimisations. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <[email protected]> --- > >> diff --git a/meta/classes/populate_sdk.bbclass > >> b/meta/classes/populate_sdk.bbclass index 0f3591b..8c19e83 100644 --- > >> a/meta/classes/populate_sdk.bbclass +++ > >> b/meta/classes/populate_sdk.bbclass @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ SDK_DIR = > >> "${WORKDIR}/sdk" > >> SDK_OUTPUT = "${SDK_DIR}/image" > >> SDK_DEPLOY = "${TMPDIR}/deploy/sdk" > >> -SDKTARGETSYSROOT = "${SDKPATH}/sysroots/${TARGET_SYS}" > >> +SDKTARGETSYSROOT = "${SDKPATH}/sysroots/${MULTIMACH_TARGET_SYS}" > > > > In gcc-configure-sdk.inc, it is set > > "--with-sysroot=${SDKPATH}/sysroots/${TARGET_SYS}". > > Is there any inconsistency? > > Binutils might also need updating.
This is an interesting question. We certainly compile in a default path for the sysroot but we in general always override it from the environment anyway. As long as the package architectures for the sdk components are correct we should be able to update the defaults. I've not yet checked that though. Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
