[Buildroot] lua interpreter choice?

Danomi Manchego danomimanchego123 at gmail.com
Wed Jul 30 22:34:40 UTC 2014


On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Thomas Petazzoni
<thomas.petazzoni at free-electrons.com> wrote:
> Dear Danomi Manchego,
>
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 14:51:49 -0400, Danomi Manchego wrote:
>
>> > this change in the virtual-package behavior was introduced by
>> > http://git.buildroot.net/buildroot/commit/?id=91169d3346e543be18139e18bdcc52a2345e0d16
>> > (infra/pkg-virtual: validate only one provider provides an implementation)
>> >
>> > François
>>
>> But the menuconfig still lets you select both packages, instead of
>> providing a choice of one or the other (like "jpeg support").  Is this
>> not undesirable?
>
> We discussed this before doing the commit pointed by François.
> Unfortunately, there's no good solution to solve this problem at the
> kconfig level. The only solution would be to have each package being a
> provider of a certain virtual package, have the knowledge of *all*
> providers of that virtual packages to do a "depends
> on !BR2_PACKAGE_<foo>". While for lua vs. luajit this seems more or
> less reasonable, as we probably don't expect to have more providers
> than just lua and luajit, but in the general case, we have things like
> libgles or egl (for OpenGL support) which have multiple providers, and
> we don't want to have to edit all of them whenever we add a new
> provider.
>
> Not speaking about packages in BR2_EXTERNAL, which we cannot control.
>
> So our decision was to use a build-time check rather than a
> kconfig-time check.
>
> Hope this clarifies the situation,

Let me apologize in advance if I'm still missing something obvious but
- what distinguishes the lua/luajit case from the libjpeg/jpeg-turbo
case, or the systemd/eudev case?  Is the virtual-package
infrastructure + kconfig choice not suitable here?

Danomi -



More information about the buildroot mailing list