[Buildroot] svn commit: trunk/buildroot/package: alsa-lib

Bernhard Fischer rep.dot.nop at gmail.com
Mon Jul 23 13:34:00 UTC 2007


On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 03:18:05PM +0200, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
>
>>+$(ALSA_LIB_DIR)/src/.libs/$(ALSA_LIB_BINARY): $(ALSA_LIB_DIR)/.configured
>> >+	$(MAKE) -C $(ALSA_LIB_DIR)
>> >+	@touch -c $@
>> >+
>> >+$(STAGING_DIR)/$(ALSA_LIB_TARGET_BINARY): $(ALSA_LIB_DIR)/src/.libs/$(ALSA_LIB_BINARY)
>> >+	$(MAKE) DESTDIR=$(STAGING_DIR) -C $(ALSA_LIB_DIR) install
>> >+	@touch -c $@
>> >+
>> >+$(TARGET_DIR)/$(ALSA_LIB_TARGET_BINARY): $(STAGING_DIR)/$(ALSA_LIB_TARGET_BINARY)
>> >+	@mkdir -p $(TARGET_DIR)/usr/share/alsa
>> >+	@mkdir -p $(TARGET_DIR)/usr/lib/alsa-lib
>> >+	cp -dpf  $(STAGING_DIR)/lib/libasound.so*  $(TARGET_DIR)/usr/lib/
>> >+	cp -rdpf $(STAGING_DIR)/usr/share/alsa/*   $(TARGET_DIR)/usr/share/alsa/
>> >+	cp -rdpf $(STAGING_DIR)/usr/lib/alsa-lib/* $(TARGET_DIR)/usr/lib/alsa-lib/
>> 
>> install(1) would be cleaner, especially if you consider that it's a new
>> package.
>
>make install is done on the staging dir.

make install != install(1)
man install
$(INSTALL) -D /thisfile /thatfile /there/newdir
or something like that.

>I think the reason for not doing make install on the target dir is
>that it will add a lot of other stuff which is not wanted on an embedded
>system.

This is unrelated but true, yes :)

>It is a matter of taste if you "install and remove", or just copy
>the *needed* stuff. 

I prefer to just copy the needed stuff.

>Have to discuss with Someone Else(tm) if you insist.

Just using install(1) for new packages -- and eventually gradually
fixing old ones -- is sufficient. We can easily either use busybox's
install or have our own in buildroot to circumvent eventual buggy
incarnations on the host. This would also help the MacOS10 folks, i'd
say.



More information about the buildroot mailing list