buildroot.busybox.net archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas De Schampheleire <patrickdepinguin@gmail.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/pkg-meson: ensure the global cross-compilation.conf file is correct
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2019 21:53:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAXf6LXzABqbB6M_YoHxMnJEgCq2k+PaQZRQ6=E1j=rs_XU+pg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0425a272-d1d6-ba63-2788-a3cc02a32ae0@mind.be>

El vie., 6 dic. 2019 a las 12:31, Arnout Vandecappelle
(<arnout@mind.be>) escribi?:
>
>
>
> On 06/12/2019 11:16, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
> > El vie., 6 dic. 2019 a las 10:57, Thomas Petazzoni
> > (<thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>) escribi?:
> >>
> >> On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 10:54:13 +0100
> >> Thomas De Schampheleire <patrickdepinguin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Needless to say, I am opposed to moving the meson file back from the
> >>> target-finalize step :-)
> >>> I think most of the reasoning was already mentioned in that commit,
> >>> but it seems I did not explain that we actually have HOST_DIR mounted
> >>> read-only on subsequent 'make' commands after the initial make,
> >>> exactly to verify that no-one is changing directories they shouldn't
> >>> be changing. After all, a 'make' after the initial make will only
> >>> normally do the target-finalize step.
> >>
> >> No, it will do staging-finalize as well. I don't think we provide the
> >> guarantee that HOST_DIR is unchanged/read-only between each "make"
> >> invocation, and I'm not sure why we would want to provide this
> >> guarantee.
> >
> > The fact that staging-finalize is triggered from target-finalize is
> > also a problem in my use case, and I have cleared it in our local copy
> > (moving its action to another place). I think we talked about that
> > earlier too.
> >
> > I think Yann suggested me to look into the sdk in this context. I need
> > to check it in more detail soon, to see whether it can really solve
> > this friction we have between our current needs and changes upstream.
> >
> > To recap our use case: we make an initial Buildroot build, package it,
> > then in other machines but on the same virtual path (mounted to the
> > same location inside a docker container) extract it. Then,
> > applications are built outside of Buildroot, but stored to a copy of
> > the output/target directory. Then a subsequent 'make' is run to let
> > Buildroot package everything into an initramfs, setting TARGET_DIR to
> > the copy.
>
>  SDK is not going to work for that last bit.
>
>  The problem is that overall, Buildroot doesn't have a great story for
> rebuilding things from a partial build. To be honest, I think you're better off
> not using Buildroot to package the initramfs, but just make a simple script that
> you run in fakeroot:
>
> tar -x rootfs.tar
> rsync custom packages
> cpio ...
>
>
>  That is, assuming that the custom packages don't need to do things like adding
> users etc. But if they're built outside of buildroot, that's not going to work
> anyway.

Aside from the initramfs creation, we also rely on the other stuff
happening in target-finalize, like stripping of objects,
rootfs-overlays, post-build scripts, ... Duplicating this logic is not
ideal.

But perhaps I could solve my use case by making the dependency of
target-finalize on host-finalize and staging-finalize optional,
steerable via a variable. Then I could use the default flow for the
initial build, and pass the steer-variable to cut the dependency on
the subsequent make. I'd need to try it to make sure it fits what I
need.
This modification may or may not be acceptable for upstreaming, but
probably is easier than trying to force you in keeping
staging-finalize and host-finalize empty.

Best regards,
Thomas

  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-06 20:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-04 15:02 [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/pkg-meson: ensure the global cross-compilation.conf file is correct Thomas Petazzoni
2019-12-04 16:49 ` Peter Seiderer
2019-12-05 22:13 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2019-12-06  7:59   ` Thomas Petazzoni
2019-12-06  8:58     ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2019-12-06  9:00       ` Thomas Petazzoni
2019-12-06  9:54   ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-12-06  9:55     ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-12-06  9:57     ` Thomas Petazzoni
2019-12-06 10:16       ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-12-06 11:31         ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2019-12-06 20:53           ` Thomas De Schampheleire [this message]
2020-09-14 20:04 ` Yann E. MORIN
2020-09-15 19:03   ` Peter Korsgaard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAAXf6LXzABqbB6M_YoHxMnJEgCq2k+PaQZRQ6=E1j=rs_XU+pg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=patrickdepinguin@gmail.com \
    --cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).