-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09-10-10 00:21, Chris Larson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Frans Meulenbroeks < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> 2010/10/7 Khem Raj <[email protected]>: >>> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Koen Kooi <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>> >>>> On 07-10-10 03:46, Khem Raj wrote: >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> Following set of patches is v2 of the patches adding support for >> getting libtool 2.4 into >>>>> openemebedded. I have so far built minimal-image for two machines >> successfully using old >>>>> and new libtool. >>>>> >>>>> The libtool sysroot feature knob is added through LIBTOOL_HAS_SYSROOT >> variable. If this is >>>>> set to "yes" then you ought to use libtool > 2.4 by default its set to >> "no" which means >>>>> the current behavior remains. >>>>> >>>>> The big change that libtool 2.4 brings is sysroot support and I have >> added >>>>> support to use this feature. It should make our life easier. >>>>> >>>>> This needs a lot of testing. >>>>> >>>>> Please cherry pick the patch bundle and give it a try in yout >> environment >>>> >>>> Can you apply these to a branch so we can add fixes there if needed? >>> >>> I can do that. However now that backward compatibility is left intact I >> think >>> it would not be that bad to merge it into master and fix things on >>> master. the libtool >>> 2.4 would have DEFAULT_PREFERENCE = "-1" by default it wont be picked by >> anyone. >>> with the number of developers we have it will get better testing before >> we >>> accumulate too many changes on a branch. Secondly there might be changes >> like >>> gnutls one where the patch is only valid for new libtool and should be >> tested >>> in old and new way. If there is any breakage introduced in existing build >> will >>> be caught quickly. Where as on branch resources might be divided and it >> may >>> not progress so well. I am just weighing efforts Vs. risk here and >>> risk seems low >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Khem >>> >>>> >> >> Personally I'm in favour of merging into head. That way it gets >> accepted easier and faster. >> > > Agreed, I am as well. As the new libtool is opt-in, I don't see the harm, > and it'll ensure that any issues which crop up with the compatibility get > fixed asap.
Yeah, let's get this in! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFMsEXlMkyGM64RGpERAsjyAKCc6eHVMBOfE27SW20BiCWvs7mdXACfYG6I 1zsti6PHxpCCOGHvqWBw4zI= =4QWi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
