On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 07:00:26PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > Hi Sasha. > > > I was just thinking, the kernel build system is great for compiling > > barebox itself, but for compiling the userspace host and target tools > > autotools would be a better match as they much better allow to specify > > the necessary compilers and to pull the necessary dependencies in. > > What specific problems are you trying to solve that is > not solved today by the support in scripts/Makefile.host? No really specific problems. I just think that while handmade Makefiles are good for the kernel/barebox, compiling userspace tools feels more natural using widespread userspace build environments. Manually calling pkg-config doesn't sound like a good idea and probably we would need another pkg-config when compiling for the target. Now we normally do not want to build the USB upload tools we have for the target, so this argument doesn't really count. > > I notice you want to build tools for the target as well. > This should be relatively easy to add support for that using > the current kbuild syntax. We do this already using targetprogs-y > > I we are going for something more standard then cmake or meson > are more modern choices than the dreadful autotools stuff. > And with modern I also imply better / simpler. I didn't know about meson. This one sounds interesting and Michael Olbrich, our build system expert, also has good things to tell about meson. As said, there are no concrete problems I wanted to solve, I just had the vague feeling that for example integration into build systems like YOCTO or ptxdist) might get simpler. Anyway, it was just an idea. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
