1 Mar
2017
1 Mar
'17
6 p.m.
On 03/01/2017 07:25 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
Hello,
On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:02:27 +0300, Vlad Zakharov wrote:
Yeah that would work fine I guess !
This commit enables getpt() support in ARC
defconfigs as some packages
need it. E.g. we need this to be able to build xterm package as it uses
getpt().
As an example I can refer to buildroot autobuilds where xterm build is
failing when using prebuilt ARC toolchain (which in its turn uses uClibc
without getpt() support):
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__autobuild.buildroot.net…
Signed-off-by: Vlad Zakharov <vzakhar(a)synopsys.com>
---
extra/Configs/defconfigs/arc/arcv2_defconfig | 1 +
extra/Configs/defconfigs/arc/defconfig | 1 +
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
That's more of a question for Waldemar: does
it really makes sense to
have defconfigs for each architecture? I mean how do they differ
between each other?
For example, the ARC arcv2_defconfig and defconfig only differ by the
option CONFIG_ARC_CPU_HS, whose only purpose is to pass -mcpu=archs.
Shouldn't be the solution used on ARM (removing all options to select
the compiler flags, and leave it to the user to pass the appropriate
options) be used as well ? So, are they really useful? Shouldn't uclibc-ng
instead come with just
one or two defconfigs, like a "minimal" one and "full-featured" one?
totally agree and I've historically been pushing back on patches from Alexey et
all where we wanted to enable toggles to get buildroot packages building. That was
a fair requirement on their part but it kept bloating uClibc for our typical
embedded use. But this idea of minimal vs. full featured is exactly what we need.
@Alexey / @vlad can we take this up please !
Thx,
-Vineet
Best regards,
Thomas