Antti Kantee writes ("minor app-tools modifications"):
> Made the following changes:
> 1) rename rumpxen-app-foo to rumpapp-xen-foo to make a future
> s/xen/other/ case more obvious.
> 2) made rumpapp-xen-make automatically execute make. this makes the
> usage of the tool the same as regular make, and enables hardlinking
> rumpapp-xen-make to make and play $PATH games. In case
> $RUMP_APPTOOLS_MAKE is set, that gets executed instead.
> 3) added rumpapp-xen-gmake as a shorthand.
> 4) made cc respect $RUMP_APPTOOLS_CC. Would've wanted to use just $CC,
> but since make already sets CC to rumpapp-xen-cc, that's not possible.
>
> https://github.com/rumpkernel/rumpuser-xen/compare/tools-newusage
>
> ok or comments?
Can we have some compatibility wrappers ? Otherwise osstest's tests
are going to fail. Alternatively I could make osstest understand both
but I think that's probably more work.
We can delete the compatibility wrappers after I have updated osstest
to use the new ones.
> Is there any reason that the -D arguments to cc are in cc, and the -U
> argument to cc are in specs? Can I just put all of them into specs so
> as to group logically similar parameters?
I think that would be fine, yes.
> Can we replace -D__RUMPUSER_XEN__ with something like a more generic
> -D__RUMPAPP__?
Not without coordinating with code in xen.git. Defining both would be
fine IMO.
> Is the way CC gets set in the configure wrapper a bug? I'm guessing it
> should be this way:
>
> -exec "$prog" --host=!ARCH!-rumpxen-netbsd CC=!APPTOOLS!/rumpapp-xen-cc
> +CC=!APPTOOLS!/rumpapp-xen-cc exec "$prog" --host=!ARCH!-rumpxen-netbsd
Um, what is the difference here ? I can't remember why I passed it as
an argument but I think I found setting it in the environment wasn't
effective. (But perhaps that was in the context of make.)
> However, that makes running configure very slow, since the whole xen
> image is linked for every test.
Is it not currently ? Surely it's not using the base compiler and
linker. That wouldn't work at all.
> Also, the wrapper script is probably missing "$@".
Yes, it does appear to be. That's a mistake.
> As a note, couldn't figure out how to pass the --host parameter to
> configure transparently. However, shouldn't it be --target?
This is GNU terminology. It's very confusing. They use "host" to
refer to what everyone else calls "target". They use "target" only
for the final target architecture cross toolchain (eg, a Canadian
cross where there are three different architectures).
Ian.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
_______________________________________________
rumpkernel-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rumpkernel-users
