[Buildroot] [PATCH next 1/4] toolchain: add common binutils version hidden config options

Vicente Olivert Riera Vincent.Riera at imgtec.com
Tue May 31 10:38:37 UTC 2016


Hello Yann,

first of all, thank you for your review.

Below are some inline comments.

On 27/05/16 18:34, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> Vicente, All,
> 
> On 2016-05-27 13:25 +0100, Vicente Olivert Riera spake thusly:
>> This commit adds a number of hidden Config.in options, that will be used
>> to handle dependencies on the binutils version. We mimic the model that
>> was used for the kernel headers dependency mechanism.
>>
>> These hidden options will be selected by the internal and external
>> toolchain backend logic respectively, in follow-up commits.
> 
> I'm not arguing whether the patches are good or not, but I'd like to
> understand why we need those options.
> 
> As far as I can see, none of your patches make any package depend on any
> of those new options.
> 
> Would you care to explain (in the commit log) why these are needed,
> please?

I'll do it.

> Are you planning on making any existing package use them? If not, are
> you planning to send new packages that will use them?

Yes, to make valgrind dependant on certain version of binutils for MIPS.
Although all packages will benefit of these new options if necessary.

> Thanks! ;-)
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Vicente Olivert Riera <Vincent.Riera at imgtec.com>
>> ---
>>  toolchain/toolchain-common.in | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/toolchain/toolchain-common.in b/toolchain/toolchain-common.in
>> index 1fe28a9..deede7b 100644
>> --- a/toolchain/toolchain-common.in
>> +++ b/toolchain/toolchain-common.in
>> @@ -327,6 +327,45 @@ config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST
>>  	default "4.4"	if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_4_4
>>  	default "4.3"	if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_4_3
>>  
>> +config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_20
>> +	bool
> 
> Any specific reason, except it is a "round" number and more than 6-year
> old, to pick 2.20 as the oldest we know of?

Because we have one toolchain that uses binutils-2.20:
BR2_TOOLCHAIN_EXTERNAL_ARAGO_ARMV7A

Regards,

Vincent.

>> +config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_21
>> +	bool
>> +	select BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_20
>> +
>> +config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_22
>> +	bool
>> +	select BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_21
>> +
>> +config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_23
>> +	bool
>> +	select BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_22
>> +
>> +config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_24
>> +	bool
>> +	select BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_23
>> +
>> +config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_25
>> +	bool
>> +	select BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_24
>> +
>> +config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_26
>> +	bool
>> +	select BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_25
>> +
>> +# This order guarantees that the highest version is set, as kconfig
>> +# stops affecting a value on the first matching default.
>> +config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST
>> +	string
>> +	default "2.26" if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_26
>> +	default "2.25" if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_25
>> +	default "2.24" if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_24
>> +	default "2.23" if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_23
>> +	default "2.22" if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_22
>> +	default "2.21" if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_21
>> +	default "2.20" if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_2_20
> 
> Otherwise:
> 
>     Reviewed-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998 at free.fr>
> 
> Regards,
> Yann E. MORIN.
> 
>>  config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_SYNC_1
>>  	bool
>>  	default y
>> -- 
>> 2.7.3
>>
> 


More information about the buildroot mailing list