[Buildroot] [PATCH] targets: move target options to their own sub-menu

[Thomas De Schampheleire]

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998 at free.fr> wrote:
> Thomas, All,
>
> On 2013-08-16 12:30 +0200, Thomas De Schampheleire spake thusly:
>>
>> Here is a slightly different viewpoint: some users will never touch
>> the bootloader. However, creating a kernel and rootfs (possibly
>> attached to the kernel) is very common. This can result in the
>> following order:
>>
>> (Target options)
>> Build options
>> Toolchain
>> System configuration
>> Kernel
>> Package selection for the target
>> Filesystem images
>> Bootloaders
>> Host Utilities
>> Legacy config options
>
> Hey! It looks good to me! :-)
> I'll handle this. Thanks!
>

Great!

>> By the way: isn't it more logical to put 'Bootloaders' in singular
>> (Bootloader), since one typically builds only one bootloader, just as
>> one only builds one kernel...
>
> This is two-sided:
>   - either you consider what Buildroot has to offer: one kernel, and
>     multiple bootloaders;
>   - or you consider what the user may want to install on the targe, at
>     most one kernel, and at most one bootloader.
>
> I prefer the first option. If at some point in the future Buildroot gets
> support for alternative kernels (GNU/Hurd, someone? ;-) ), then we'd
> have to s/Kernel/Kernels/.

Ok, agreed.

>
> Consequently, "Package selection for the target" should be a plural
> "Packages selection for target".

'Packages selection' sounds odd to me, I'm not even sure it's proper
English. A 'selection' always refers to a (potential) plural, so I
think 'Package selection' is more correct.

However, why such a long name? Is 'Target packages' not equally clear,
and more in line with the other menu names?

Best regards,
Thomas