On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:50 AM, David Woodhouse wrote: >> On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 08:23 -0700, Tim Bird wrote: >>> Rob Landley wrote: >>> > However, having one or more full-time engineers devoted to debugging >>> > cross-compile issues is quite a high price to pay too. Moore's law really >>> > doesn't help that one. >>> > >>> > I'm not saying either solution is perfect, I'm just saying the "build under >>> > emulation" approach is a viable alternative that gets more attractive as time >>> > passes, both because of ongoing development on emulators and because of >>> > Moore's law on the hardware. >>> >>> I agree with much that you have said, Rob, and I understand the argument >>> for getting the most gain from the least resources, but I have a philosophical >>> problem with working around the cross-compilation problems instead of fixing >>> them in the upstream packages (or in the autoconf system itself). >>> >>> Once someone fixes the cross-compilation issues for a package, they usually >>> stay fixed, if the fixes are mainlined. >> >> I don't think that's true, unfortunately. Autoconf makes it _easy_ to do >> the wrong thing, and people will often introduce new problems. >> >> If we just made people write portable code and proper Makefiles, it >> would be less of an issue :) > > people cant even write proper *native* makefiles. mtd-utils for example ;). What's wrong with it? I'll fix it. josh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
