On 10/4/12 1:15 PM, Trevor Woerner wrote:
I'm curious to know if anyone (I certainly wouldn't be able to!) can
take a guess whether this would "play nicely" with external
toolchains?

In other words, if some recipe is already PROVIDES'ing
virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}gcc etc would the correct toolchain be used
for the special packages needing the secondary toolchain?

My expectations is that any existing dependency set will be managed and maintained by the existing primary toolchain, unless a given recipe has a specific dependency on a secondary toolchain item.

I.e. the example above will -always- be the primary toolchain from a dependency resolution standpoint..

If the recipe adds "virtual/icc", then something, such as icc, needs to exist to provide that.

Does this seem like a reasonable behavior and expectation? (The thing to remember is this secondary toolchain is just that.. an alternative to the primary for specific users and NOT general purpose....)

--Mark

_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core



_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Reply via email to