[LinuxBIOS] [PATCH] many trivial patches

[Myles Watson]

This adds the same line (uses CONFIG_PRECOMPRESSED_PAYLOAD) to every
Options.lb file that already had a "uses
CONFIG_COMPRESSED_PAYLOAD_LZMA" line in it.

I figure that only adding it to the files that already have support
for LZMA payloads makes sure I don't break anything.

Myles

Signed-off-by: Myles Watson <[e-mail]>

[Peter Stuge]

On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 02:02:16PM -0700, Myles Watson wrote:
> This adds the same line (uses CONFIG_PRECOMPRESSED_PAYLOAD) to every
> Options.lb file that already had a "uses
> CONFIG_COMPRESSED_PAYLOAD_LZMA" line in it.

If I understood correctly there should be a corresponding
default CONFIG_PRECOMPRESSED_PAYLOAD x

line in the target/ Options.lb files.


//Peter

[Myles Watson]

> > This adds the same line (uses CONFIG_PRECOMPRESSED_PAYLOAD) to every
> > Options.lb file that already had a "uses
> > CONFIG_COMPRESSED_PAYLOAD_LZMA" line in it.
>
> If I understood correctly there should be a corresponding
> default CONFIG_PRECOMPRESSED_PAYLOAD x
>
> line in the target/ Options.lb files.

None of the architectures have a default CONFIG_PRECOMPRESSED_PAYLOAD.

Since "uses CONFIG_PRECOMPRESSED_PAYLOAD" allows you to use the option, but
doesn't force it, I don't think you need the default line.  It might be
better style. There are a lot of CONFIG_... options that don't have defaults
in the Options.lb files, though.

Myles

[Myles Watson]

This is a resend.  Does anyone have objections to this patch still?

It adds "uses CONFIG_PRECOMPRESSED_PAYLOAD" to the Options.lb files so
that buildrom can build for these targets only changing the Config.lb
file, instead of patching the Options.lb files as well.

Myles

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Myles Watson <[e-mail]>
Date: Nov 7, 2007 2:02 PM
Subject: [PATCH] many trivial patches
To: Linuxbios <[e-mail]>

This adds the same line (uses CONFIG_PRECOMPRESSED_PAYLOAD) to every
Options.lb file that already had a "uses
CONFIG_COMPRESSED_PAYLOAD_LZMA" line in it.

I figure that only adding it to the files that already have support
for LZMA payloads makes sure I don't break anything.

Myles

Signed-off-by: Myles Watson <[e-mail]>

[Uwe Hermann]

On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 10:58:03AM -0700, Myles Watson wrote:
> This is a resend.  Does anyone have objections to this patch still?

Did you check with abuild that all boards still build fine after the
patch? Did you compare the sizes, i.e. does it make a real difference
in behaviour of the build, or is it just a "cosmetical" change?


Uwe.
-- 
http://www.hermann-uwe.de  | http://www.holsham-traders.de
http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org

[Ward Vandewege]

On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 07:55:19PM +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 10:58:03AM -0700, Myles Watson wrote:
> > This is a resend.  Does anyone have objections to this patch still?
>
> Did you check with abuild that all boards still build fine after the
> patch? Did you compare the sizes, i.e. does it make a real difference
> in behaviour of the build, or is it just a "cosmetical" change?

It's not cosmetic. Without this patch, we can't have an LZMA precompressed
payload for the board (which is an option in buildrom).

If the boards still build (which I suspect they will),  

Acked-by: Ward Vandewege <[e-mail]>

Thanks,
Ward.

-- 
Ward Vandewege <[e-mail]>
Free Software Foundation - Senior System Administrator

[Myles Watson]

> > > This is a resend.  Does anyone have objections to this patch still?
> >
> > Did you check with abuild that all boards still build fine after the
> > patch? Did you compare the sizes, i.e. does it make a real difference
> > in behaviour of the build, or is it just a "cosmetical" change?
>
> It's not cosmetic. Without this patch, we can't have an LZMA precompressed
> payload for the board (which is an option in buildrom).

As I understand it, all the precompressed payload option does is tells the
build process not to try to run lzma on the payload when LZMA compression is
enabled.  

It allows buildrom to use its own compiled version of lzma instead of the
one that the user might have in his path.

Since I didn't set the variable, but just allowed it to be set in the
future, my hypothesis is that it changes nothing for abuild.

I'm running abuild now.
> If the boards still build (which I suspect they will),
>
> Acked-by: Ward Vandewege <[e-mail]>

Thanks,
Myles

[Myles Watson]

> I'm running abuild now.

It passes abuild.

Thanks,
Myles
> > If the boards still build (which I suspect they will),
> >
> > Acked-by: Ward Vandewege <[e-mail]>

[Ward Vandewege]

On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 01:16:39PM -0700, Myles Watson wrote:
> > I'm running abuild now.
>
> It passes abuild.

Excellent, commit away!

Thanks,
Ward.
> > > If the boards still build (which I suspect they will),
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Ward Vandewege <[e-mail]>

[Uwe Hermann]

On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 03:21:34PM -0500, Ward Vandewege wrote:
> > > > Acked-by: Ward Vandewege <[e-mail]>

Thanks, r3002.


Uwe.
-- 
http://www.hermann-uwe.de  | http://www.holsham-traders.de
http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org