per-project uclibc configuration does not really work
buildroot's project support (eg saveconfig target) appears to offer per-project uClibc .config support and per-project uClibc version selection.
However, uclibc is built into the per-arch toolchain_build_$(ARCH) directory and installed into build_$(ARCH), rather than the per-project build directory project_build_$(ARCH)/$(PROJECT). And so is the gcc cross-compiler built against that uclibc.
Only a few packages build into the per-project build directly, name busybox and uclibc. The problem is that if you change your uclibc configuration you may well need to rebuild all your programs too, because autoconf tests might return different results etc.
Effectively you have to build everything per-project (including the whole toolchain).
Is there much benefit in trying to share package builds between projects, as buildroot does right now?
Hamish
Signature · 1 line
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Quoted 9 lines · Hamish Moffatt
buildroot's project support (eg saveconfig target) appears to offer per-project uClibc .config support and per-project uClibc version selection.
However, uclibc is built into the per-arch toolchain_build_$(ARCH) directory and installed into build_$(ARCH), rather than the per-project build directory project_build_$(ARCH)/$(PROJECT). And so is the gcc cross-compiler built against that uclibc.
Quoted 7 lines
Only a few packages build into the per-project build directly, name busybox and uclibc. The problem is that if you change your uclibc configuration you may well need to rebuild all your programs too, because autoconf tests might return different results etc.
Effectively you have to build everything per-project (including the whole toolchain).
See "using PROJECTs with buildroot" in the archives.
Quoted 3 lines
Is there much benefit in trying to share package builds between projects, as buildroot does right now?
I don't think so.