[Buildroot] [PATCH 4/9] manual: faq: add entry about the relocatable toolchain
s.martin49 at gmail.com
Sat Feb 23 13:33:49 UTC 2013
2013/2/14 Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni at free-electrons.com>:
> Dear Samuel Martin,
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 23:59:05 +0100, Samuel Martin wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Samuel Martin <s.martin49 at gmail.com>
>> docs/manual/faq-troubleshooting.txt | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>> diff --git a/docs/manual/faq-troubleshooting.txt b/docs/manual/faq-troubleshooting.txt
>> index f91a8ef..8b0882a 100644
>> --- a/docs/manual/faq-troubleshooting.txt
>> +++ b/docs/manual/faq-troubleshooting.txt
>> @@ -126,3 +126,24 @@ directory as the new root, will most likely fail.
>> If you want to run the target filesystem inside a chroot, or as an NFS
>> root, then use the tarball image generated in +images/+ and extract it
>> as root.
>> +Are Buildroot toolchains relocatable?
>> +Because Buildroot uses several toolchain backends, there is one anwser
>> +per backend:
>> +Using the external or crosstool-NG toolchain backend
>> +These toolchains are mostly likely relocatable; the _Buildroot compiler
>> +wrapper_ is relocatable.
>> +However, some tools built and installed into the +HOST_DIR+ may not be
>> +relocatable, with some absolute pathes hard-coded inside.
> I find this text rather confusing. What does "mostly likely" means for
> the reader? The reader surely wants to know if the toolchain is
> relocatable or not.
> Therefore, I think this text should be changed to clarify what is meant
> by "toolchain". Is it just the bare toolchain (gcc, binutils, libc,
> kernel headers), or is it the complete toolchain that Buildroot
> produces, with all the additional libraries and headers?
I agree with this point.
> Also, you mention the "Buildroot compiler wrapper", but nowhere in the
> documentation we explain what it is, and I don't think it should be
> explained in the documentation, except in a section dedicated to "Deep
> Buildroot internals", but certainly not to answer a FAQ question about
> relocatable toolchains.
> I would rather think that a section discussing how to use the "SDK"
> produced by Buildroot, and how it can be shared with application
> developers, could mention that the SDK is currently not relocatable,
> but that we are working on fixing this.
Well, this will certainly be a better section to develop this point.
The SDK section will come later (not sure it'll be ready for the
More information about the buildroot