From: Frank L. <mai...@hi...> - 2006-05-24 07:16:35
|
Hi, there are two busybox.config after having downloaded the trunk. One is in 'package/busybox', the other in 'target/device/Gumstix/basix-connex'. The 'package/busybox/busybox.config' is ignored. It took me some time to find out, why my changes did have no effects. Is there a reason for the two files. If no, I suggest to remove the unused one from the trunk. Frank |
From: Alexandre P. N. <al...@om...> - 2006-05-24 12:29:44
|
Frank Leipold escreveu: > Hi, > there are two busybox.config after having downloaded the trunk. One is > in 'package/busybox', the other in 'target/device/Gumstix/basix-connex'. > > The 'package/busybox/busybox.config' is ignored. It took me some time > to find out, why my changes did have no effects. > > Is there a reason for the two files. If no, I suggest to remove the > unused one from the trunk. > > > Frank > > There's a reason, whether or not it's relevant is arguable. The original buildroot was conceived to have multi targets, so you can build an image for a generic architeture such as arm or ix86, or to a specific target which can be customized, like gumstix, that besides having a specific architeture, also has customizated target properties. The gumstix target was customized to include things specially tunned for it, such as busybox's own config, so the generic ones aren't used. The question of relevance is that removing will kill portability, but portability was never a concern to this particular target, so that's a matter of taste ... Perhaps documenting it somewhere will do the trick... - Alexandre |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2006-05-24 23:41:41
|
On May 24, 2006, at 5:29 AM, Alexandre Pereira Nunes wrote: > Frank Leipold escreveu: > >> Hi, >> there are two busybox.config after having downloaded the trunk. >> One is in 'package/busybox', the other in 'target/device/Gumstix/ >> basix-connex'. >> >> The 'package/busybox/busybox.config' is ignored. It took me some >> time to find out, why my changes did have no effects. >> >> Is there a reason for the two files. If no, I suggest to remove >> the unused one from the trunk. >> >> >> Frank >> >> > > There's a reason, whether or not it's relevant is arguable. The > original buildroot was conceived to have multi targets, so you can > build an image for a generic architeture such as arm or ix86, or to > a specific target which can be customized, like gumstix, that > besides having a specific architeture, also has customizated target > properties. > > The gumstix target was customized to include things specially > tunned for it, such as busybox's own config, so the generic ones > aren't used. > > The question of relevance is that removing will kill portability, > but portability was never a concern to this particular target, so > that's a matter of taste ... Perhaps documenting it somewhere will > do the trick... It's now officially documented in the mailing list archives :) C |
From: Alexandre P. N. <al...@om...> - 2006-05-25 13:19:52
|
> [cut] > It's now officially documented in the mailing list archives :) > > C Indeed. But I guess some people will complain :-P - Alexandre |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2006-05-25 17:50:20
|
On May 25, 2006, at 6:19 AM, Alexandre Pereira Nunes wrote: > >> [cut] >> It's now officially documented in the mailing list archives :) >> >> C > > > Indeed. But I guess some people will complain :-P Well, someday we'll migrate it into the forums, and then everyone will be happy ;) C |