Re: rescue/ broke cross compiles

On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 08:10:02PM -0700, Tim Kientzle wrote:
> 
> Looking through the build tools for /bin/sh, it's definitely
> not worth the effort to try copying build tools around.
> Although it sounds easy to add a build-tools target to
> handle this, I'm not sure I see exactly how to do this.
> Any suggestions?

Add a build-tools target to the Makefile in rescue and have it
recurse to the tools that have a build-tools target. Of course
rescue needs to be added to Makefile.inc

> For the longer term, perhaps it would be desirable to
> simply eliminate as many of the build-tools as possible?

Elimination can be good as a way to remove gratuitous complexity,
but gratuitous elimination as a way to remove complexity is probably
not the way to go.

> For example, the attached is a pretty close substitute for
> mkinit.c in the /bin/sh build.  It's crude, but it seems to work
> and eliminates the need to compile mkinit at build time.

In general I think that the more portable the build tool, the better.
If the shell script is not gross or overly ugly compared to the C
program, then replacing the latter may not be a bad idea.  I leave
this for other to decide, unless there's only 1 build tool we need
to handle for rescue and we can solve our problem by using the shell
script instead of adding make logic.

-- 
 Marcel Moolenaar	  USPA: A-39004		 marcel_at_xcllnt.net