Sat Jan 1 00:30:00 GMT 2011

Hesben, All,

Happy New Year! :-)

On Friday 31 December 2010 15:25:12 Esben Haabendal wrote:
> Why did the change from LIBC_V_* to LIBC_GLIBC_V_* happen from glibc
> 2.11, and would a patch changing it to using the same prefix for all
> glibc versions be accepted?

That's because of a (old) limitation of the kconfig language: you can't have
a choice entry be present in two different choices. Well, that's not longer
true. If the choice has a name, then you can duplicate it, with the exact
same entries in it. But we do not do that in crosstool-NG.

So this means we can not have LIBC_V_2_10 present both in the glibc version
choice, and in the eglibc version choice.

It should not happen when using scripts/ to add new versions.
I did not think not renaming the existing entries would be an issue, though.

> The current situation complicates integration of crosstool-ng as a
> non-gui backend.

I can understand. I will review Bryan's patchset right now...

Thank you for spotting the issue.

Yann E. MORIN.

|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |

For unsubscribe information see

More information about the crossgcc mailing list