Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752952AbZALKXI (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:23:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751312AbZALKWu (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:22:50 -0500 Received: from mail-gx0-f17.google.com ([209.85.217.17]:37558 "EHLO mail-gx0-f17.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750720AbZALKWt (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:22:49 -0500 Message-ID: <31014a580901120222s747d9641o641b2991baa5f8f8@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 04:22:47 -0600 From: "Mark A. Miller" To: "Sam Ravnborg" Subject: Re: PATCH [0/3]: Simplify the kernel build by removing perl. Cc: "Bernd Petrovitsch" , "Leon Woestenberg" , "Paul Mundt" , "Rob Landley" , "H. Peter Anvin" , "Embedded Linux mailing list" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Andrew Morton" In-Reply-To: <20090112101803.GB10086@uranus.ravnborg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200901020207.30359.rob@landley.net> <495FEEAF.5020005@zytor.com> <200901032006.47652.rob@landley.net> <20090104030619.GA21466@linux-sh.org> <1231677939.3517.5.camel@gimli.at.home> <31014a580901111928u586e2246uccf370ff941c8a01@mail.gmail.com> <20090112053552.GA9061@uranus.ravnborg.org> <31014a580901112150x57cd715aj5f42ee19bc28c701@mail.gmail.com> <20090112101803.GB10086@uranus.ravnborg.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1824 Lines: 38 On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 11:50:31PM -0600, Mark A. Miller wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote: >> >> There are several other packages which are broken for embedded >> >> architectures, which I will hopefully attempt to fix by submitting patches >> >> upstream. But this is why we should be cautious about including new tools >> >> for compiling the kernel. Sam Ravnborg was correct in that a C program to do >> >> the work would be the proper way. But by not addressing a currently existing >> >> problem with an adequate replacement with something that does not exist >> >> currently, seems faulty. >> > >> > Why are "make headers_install" such a crucial thing for your >> > embedded environmnet? >> >> Sanity check. If the environment cannot replicate itself, then >> something has been faulty in the cross-compiling stage, that was used >> to propagate a native environment for the target architecture. > > So you actually build your target toolchain on your target? > > Sam Correct, albeit under emulation, such as QEMU. Obviously the target architecture, such as an embedded MIPSEL device with only 8MB of flash and 64MB of RAM, is not going to (particularly well) re-compile its entire environment, QEMU allows it nicely with distcc at a reasonable speed. (Albeit there is no distconfigure, but that's entirely an unrelated tanget of muck and despair and rants against configure, but we're not going there...) -- Mark A. Miller mark@mirell.org -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/