On Mar 26, 2020, at 3:00 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki <ma...@wdc.com> wrote: > > I have actually considered extracting the bits already, but I hesitated > putting that forward that as having looked at the part that we require I > have thought it to be very messy:
Yeah, sometimes it's like that. I glanced at the work, if you think it's a step forward, I'd support importing it, my take, import from upstream isn't a bad way to go. > So I am in favour of retaining the mechanism rather than using my earlier > proposal, however I'm in two minds as to how to proceed. Integrating the > change as it is will make us having clutter left in the tree after `make > distclean', but we can do it right away. I'd support this. distclean is one rm -rf away from being clean enough. I'd not let that gate or hold up the import. If there is work that we want that's more to do with in tree building and testing (sys root fun, multilibs), while not ideal, we can deviate from upstream to support that. Though, if there is a way to naturally support that, that upstream can accept, that'd be better.
