From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: raymond zhao <raymond.zhao.ml@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 09:31:10 -0400
Subject: [Buildroot] how BR download the linux kernel now
Message-ID: <CAAa76NTwjrB-6jbenSbGDpN0evxnV-TVx36DvdNcvWnVQEfr4w@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: <buildroot.busybox.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: buildroot@busybox.net

>> The linux kernel is a special "package". Lots of embedded projects

>> (if not all of them) will start from a certain version of the kernel

>> and hack the kernel from there, such as add device drivers etc. Then,

>> put the source code into a local git server to do version control.

>> Some people argued to use original tarball plus the patch, but it

>> makes the development procedure very painful. In the old approach, it

>> is very easy to hack the linux.mk to checkout the kernel source code

>> directly into the output directory. But, in the new one. Looks it
>
>> becomes more complex. The kernel is very big. Check out with the git,
>
>> archive it to a tarball, and then extract it to the output directory
>
>> for building will waste lots of time. Is there a official solution
>
>> (or suggestion) for my situation?
>
>Yes, I am currently working on extending the package infrastructure so
>
>that any package (not only the Linux kernel, but any package) can be
>
>sourced from an existing directory, instead of being downloaded through
>
>git/svn/http.
>
>I have already published preliminary versions of this work (see "[RFC]
>
>Override source directories", posted May, 18th 2011), and I intend to
>
>continue. The basic mechanism is working, I still have issues
>
>implementing "make source" and "make external-deps" with this mechanism.
>
>It'd be really nice if you could have a look at what I did to see if it
>
>would solve your use case as well.

That's great. I will definitely check it. If we solved this problem. I
believe BR will be #1 choice for most embedded linux projects.

thanks,
raymond