[uClibc] A "vendor" top-level buildroot directory?

[Thomas Cameron]

On Thursday 13 January 2005 05:26 pm, George Joseph wrote:
> Thank you Mike.  I have read the documentation and know how to customize
> packages.  I guess my point was that maybe that's not such a good idea for
> things that might have a limited audience.  Keeping the package directory
> for stock items and using a separate directory for vendor/local stuff would
> seem a better way to organize the code.  You know you can always replace
> the package directory from the latest distribution without affecting any
> custom stuff you have.  Wouldn't that be a good thing?  It is to me.
>

A symlink would keep you from inadvertently replacing the directory...kinda. I 
typically have my specific things in a different directory 
structure...especially when I am planning on updating my buildroot tree. 
Buildroot isn't static enough to keep anything important in there, and I find 
that I will often completely blow away a tree, and replace it. Just my $.02, 
though.

-- 
Tom Cameron
tom<at>drdabbles<dot>us