Re: [meta-arm] [PATCH 3/4] external-arm-toolchain: add INHIBIT_AUTOTOOLS_DEPS

["Denys Dmytriyenko" <denis@denix.org>]

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 03:54:07PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 09:40, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote:
> >
> > From: Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com>
> >
> > Add for completeness, similar to INHIBIT_DEFAULT_DEPS, to match OE-Core, as
> > there's no autotools usage here.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com>
> > ---
> >  .../recipes-devtools/external-arm-toolchain/external-arm-toolchain.bb    | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/meta-arm-toolchain/recipes-devtools/external-arm-toolchain/external-arm-toolchain.bb b/meta-arm-toolchain/recipes-devtools/external-arm-toolchain/external-arm-toolchain.bb
> > index 33d6c35..adb2fdd 100644
> > --- a/meta-arm-toolchain/recipes-devtools/external-arm-toolchain/external-arm-toolchain.bb
> > +++ b/meta-arm-toolchain/recipes-devtools/external-arm-toolchain/external-arm-toolchain.bb
> > @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> >  require recipes-core/glibc/glibc-package.inc
> >
> >  INHIBIT_DEFAULT_DEPS = "1"
> > +INHIBIT_AUTOTOOLS_DEPS = "1"
> >
> 
> IIUC, autotools are not something that are included by default under
> DEPENDS. They are included if you specifically do "inherit autotools"
> directly or indirectly which doesn't seem to be the case with this
> recipe. So to me it seems like an unnecessary change.

Fair enough. This one was rather "nice to have" - I was down the rabbit hole 
for binutils-cross-${TARGET_ARCH} addressed in patch #2 and I noticed that 
binutils-cross.inc in OE-Core sets INHIBIT_AUTOTOOLS_DEPS w/o visible use of 
autotools. But I missed that binutils does use autotools for building and 
there is "inherit autotools" in binutils.inc. Yes, external-arm-toolchain 
doesn't inherit autotools, so no need for this variable - please skip this 
patch. Thanks.

-- 
Denys


> >  # License applies to this recipe code, not the toolchain itself
> >  LICENSE = "MIT"
> > --
> > 2.7.4
> >
> > 

>