[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 1/3] build: add support for options
jogo at openwrt.org
Tue Aug 12 07:02:06 EDT 2014
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Luka Perkov <luka at openwrt.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 06:59:15PM +0200, Jonas Gorski wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Luka Perkov <luka at openwrt.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 05:24:32PM +0200, Jonas Gorski wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Luka Perkov <luka at openwrt.org> wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 03:21:58PM +0200, Jonas Gorski wrote:
>> >> >> And further, in your approach you directly select the options, not
>> >> >> just change the defaults (in contrast to the default packages), so you
>> >> >> can't even deselect them anymore.
>> >> >
>> >> > You can deselect options with this series. That was the goal and that is
>> >> > why there are HAVE_* options present. Give it a try.
>> >> So what is the difference to FEATURES:= then? These already select
>> >> different HAVE_FOO things. Can't you just add the missing features
>> >> there?
>> > FEATURES nor DEPENDS are not good candidates for this. They are global
>> > for target/subtarget. So you can not define in same target/subtarget for
>> > one profile to include only zImage and for other to include only uImage.
>> > You can see that does not work if you look how Freescale i.MX23/i.MX28
>> > (mxs) now behaves.
>> So the clean solution is to make them both work at the same time, not
>> to add additional workarounds. Correct image generation should not
>> depend on profile selection. All these options currently alter the way
>> the single (ubi) rootfs is generated, while they should enable
>> different rootfs variants to be generated at the same time. This is
>> the root issue, and this is where it should be fixed. Yes, it isn't
>> easy to fix, but we should not break it further.
> I agree with you but this does not only solve ubi image generation
> problem. As explained before with this we can enable other options as
> well, thus once we have better fix for ubi images we can keep this for
> other purposes.
Can you please provide an example of a current configuration option we
would want to enable from a profile?
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
More information about the openwrt-devel