From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:53:14 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Report from the Buildroot Developers Meeting In-Reply-To: <511A2C3B.70604@relinux.de> References: <20130209004253.207e0741@skate> <511A19A8.4020307@relinux.de> <20130212113628.00ce121d@skate> <511A2C3B.70604@relinux.de> Message-ID: <20130212125314.41bfdbf2@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Stephan Hoffmann, On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:49:15 +0100, Stephan Hoffmann wrote: > > Why don't you build your external toolchain once, put it in a > > tarball, and then point Buildroot to it? > Because, as I wrote, I like the concept to have it integrated in > buildroot's configuration. It's integrated in your configuration: your Buildroot configuration says "use toolchain from http://foobar.com/toolchain.tar.gz", and that's it. > > You have to do this only once, and you > > can even put your toolchain tarball on a server so that others can > > use it without having to rebuild the toolchain. > > What's the advantage of your proposal against using ct-ng to build the > toolchain or use a prepared one from somewhere else? There's no advantage because my proposal is exactly what you state here: prepare a toolchain first (could be with Buildroot, with ct-ng, or some other pre-existing toolchain), and use it with Buildroot as an external toolchain. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com