On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 5:45 AM Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-03-25 at 16:16 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > libtool patch will result in configure file regeneration, instead of > > doing that at build time, do it in patch itself, this avoids running > > autoconf before configure step. > > > > Since binutils needs specific version of autoconf ( which is 2.69 ) > > this will break on systems using newer or older verisons of autoconf > > in current state. > > > > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> > > Cc: Ross Burton <ross.bur...@intel.com> > > --- > > meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc | 8 +- > > .../binutils/0007-Use-libtool-2.4.patch | 26583 ++++++++++++ > > ---- > > 2 files changed, 20352 insertions(+), 6239 deletions(-) > > Whilst I appreciate the intent here, our policy is to autoreconf most > things in general. This allows us to more easily support newer > architectures and platforms. > > There is a significant build speed benefit from not autoreconf'ing > things but where do we draw the line? >
in general this is fine but binutils, gcc , glibc can not be treated in general category since they have dependencies on specific versions of autotools unfortunately, it currently works for binutils because our version of autoconf matches with what binutils expects as of now, but this will skew if this changes in future. In nutshell, the auto-fu in these packages is quite involved and has hard dependencies on specific versions of tools needed to reconfig them. > I'm also worried about patches which touch both configure and > configure.ac since the timestamp changes can cause things to autoreconf > even when we're trying to avoid that. As such this is actually quite a > risky change given past bad experiences :( We were not fully reconfiguring binutils even now, because of other autotool sversion mimatches only autoconf was being run which does not change the case if configure was say regenerated as you say. > > I'm not completely against it but I am worried. > perhaps addresses some of your concerns. > Cheers, > > Richard >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#136760): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/136760 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/72553705/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
