[uClibc] Thoughts on buildroot targets

George Joseph gtj.member at peakin.com
Mon Jan 24 17:21:05 UTC 2005


Reinventing the wheel isn't always a bad thing.  It creates choices and
opportunity for improvement.  After all, if no one ever reinvented the
wheel, we'd all be driving around on stone tires.

Buildroot is a great environment for me.  It's compact, well organized and
easy to get started with.  The only thing that's been a pain is that I have
to build for 3 different target platforms: arm/xscale, mips and i386 each
with slightly different configs and package patch sets but still with a lot
in common.  Right now I've got 3 separate buildroot directories which makes
it hard to manage changes.  Having an extensible target structure where I
could put target-specific configs, filesystem skeletons and patches would be
a great thing.


-----Original Message-----
From: uclibc-bounces at uclibc.org [mailto:uclibc-bounces at uclibc.org] On Behalf
Of Paul Mundt
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 3:50 AM
To: andersen at codepoet.org; uClibc
Subject: Re: [uClibc] Thoughts on buildroot targets


On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 04:50:14PM -0700, Erik Andersen wrote:
> Would implementing such a structure make people happy?  Or should
> I just keep things simple and let people use i.e. openembedded
> when they want something more complex?  Thoughts anyone?
> 
This looks quite a lot like what uClinux already does. It's shown to be
a fairly reliable and flexible approach, so it's probably worth it for
that reason alone. On the other hand, this seems dangerously close to
reinventing the wheel..





More information about the uClibc mailing list