Re: crossgcc build script thoughts

[Bill Gatliff <bgat at billgatliff dot com>]

Dan et al:


First off, let me express my gratitude at the attention my little
toolchain build script has been getting lately.  I've been out of the
office for quite a while (and still am), dealing with serious personal
matters in addition to maintaining as much as I can of my professional
life.  Were my current situation different, I would have taken a more
active role in the updates.  One could rightly argue that the updates
are needed because I haven't been maintaining the scripts all that
well recently, and I'd be inclined to agree with you...

The reason my original script didn't do much with linux targets is
because I observed the same thing as you--- the build process is
different from targets that newlib supports.  Trying to support the
two targets in the same script makes the script itself difficult to
read for someone with low scripting skills, so I had always intended
to keep the two build procedures in separate scripts.  I just haven't
been able to catch up things here long enough to get something
published.

My internal scripts include prompting, but are largely driven by
environment variables.  If all the needed variables are present and
defined, no prompts occur and the script runs without user
intervention.  Dan, I'll get with you offline to show some examples,
I've found that my solutions serve both newbies and automated
processes alike.


Regards,


b.g.



On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 05:59:02PM -0700, Dan Kegel wrote:
> I'm mulling over the idea of parameterizing the crossgcc
> build script a bit differently.  Since in my experience,
> just about any component may need patching, I'm tempted
> to put the patches in a directory named after the component,
> and just apply any patches in that directory when untarring
> the component.  e.g. glibc-2.2.5-patches would contain the
> one patch needed to build glibc-2.2.5.
> 
> I also feel that, at least for the purposes of my
> experiments, supporting newlib targets is getting in
> the way, so I'm tempted to make a version of the script
> that is specialized for linux targets.
> 
> And since I'm into automation, I'm tempted to remove
> any interactive prompts from this new script.
> 
> Anyway, here's the kind of script I'm thinking about.
> It's a bit more terse and concise.  I haven't tested it
> yet, just thought I'd post it to see what folks think
> of the idea.
> - Dan


> ------
> Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
> Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
-- 
Bill Gatliff
Embedded Linux development and training services.
http://billgatliff.com

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com