[gccsdk] quilt management of patches

John Tytgat John.Tytgat at aaug.net
Fri Jul 13 15:00:29 PDT 2007

In message <4e6b00004f.peter at chocky.org>
          Peter Naulls <peter at chocky.org> wrote:

> In message <5378e6ff4e.Jo at hobbes.bass-software.com>
>           John Tytgat <John.Tytgat at aaug.net> wrote:
> > In message <39fe42fb4e.peter at chocky.org>
> >           Peter Naulls <peter at chocky.org> wrote:
> > > familiar with it, but it's very straightforward, and automates in a
> > > consistent manner stuff we now do anyway (I know we have patch
> > > generation script).
> > 
> > I had a quick look at it and although IMHO it can be used for our purposes,
> > it feels a bit as overkill to me.
> It automates a whole bunch of stuff that is semi-manual right now.

Really ? And how is the reconfiguration done ? And with quilt you still
have to say which patches need to be made (so like create-patch does).
The nice thing of quilt is that it is a patch management tool but that
feel to me as overkill.  But even then, it does not address the other
concerns I read here on ./create-gccsdk.

> > > If nothing else, it means the whole build doesn't
> > > need to be recreated for new patches.
> > 
> > I'm not sure if I understand this.  Are you talking about create-gccsdk
> > script ?
> Of course.  Is this not the case?  If it isn't, it's far from clear.

I'm not saying it is not the case, in fact it is.  But is it relevant ?
./create-gccsdk takes a bit more than one minute whom most of its time
is reconfiguration needed (after our patching of some of the autoconf
files) which you can't avoid if new or updated patches for the
configuration are imported.  If you don't do that you won't see the
imported fix or your build will break.

If that's an issue I think ./create-gccsdk can be made faster.

> > > I hope to put this in place in the next few weeks.
> > 
> > I'm all for tools which makes our lives easier and more productive but the
> > current simple patch system we're using is fine for me but I'm probably
> > a bit biased ;-) Lee, you're a regular contributor as well, do you think
> > we can use improvement here and if so, would quilt help us ?
> In my very considered opinion, the build system is way too many steps,

I must be missing something.  It is just running create-gccsdk + build-it
and then you have your installed cross-compiler.

And if you develop you just do 'make' in the top build dir or suitable
subdirectory.  And when you've finished, go to srcdir and do ../create-patch
of your changed files and then you can ci recipe directory with your fix
(personally I do a full build first to convince myself I haven't broken
the full build).  With quilt this is very similar (as I understand from
the documentation).

> and the instructions are over-complicated (the Wiki documention too I
> feel is very daunting).

Let's try to be more precise please.  Which Wiki documentation ?
<URL:http://www.riscos.info/index.php/GCCSDK_Development> ? If so, feel
free to improve it.  I started this page so that it is more public where
we (Lee & I) are at the moment.  It is ment for GCCSDK Developers,
not for the casual cross-compiler builder and user as we haven't addressed
those people for GCCSDK 4 yet.

> There's no reason it shouldn't be a case of SVN
> up + make. Remember, it has to be usable by people who only build it a
> couple of times too, not those using it constantly.  There's a world of
> difference.

For *those* people I don't see a relevant difference between
"svn update && make" and "svn update && ./create-gccsdk && ./build-it"
creating & installing the cross compiler.

I know that the riscos/* projects need suitable build hooks but atm that
it is not a priority for me right now.

John Tytgat, in his comfy chair at home                                 BASS
John.Tytgat at aaug.net                             ARM powered, RISC OS driven

More information about the gcc mailing list