[U-Boot] How do I tell buildman to use a /specific/ toolchain?

[Simon Glass]

Hi Tom,

On 20 October 2015 at 09:21, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 05:38:41PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Stephen,
> >
> > On 3 October 2015 at 20:20, Stephen Warren <swarren at wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
> > > On 10/03/2015 08:30 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> > >> Hi Stephen,
> > >>
> > >> On 2 October 2015 at 00:27, Stephen Warren <swarren at wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
> > >>> On 10/01/2015 04:59 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi Stephen,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wednesday, 23 September 2015, Stephen Warren <swarren at wwwdotorg.org>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Simon,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I have 3 different ARM toolchains installed into /usr/bin via distro
> > >>>>> packages. How do I tell buildman which of those to use?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I had originally thought that ~/.buildman's [toolchain] section contained
> > >>>>> CROSS_COMPILE-like values, so I tried:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> [toolchain]
> > >>>>>> root: /
> > >>>>>> arm0-not-installed: arm-none-gnueabi-
> > >>>>>> arm1: arm-none-eabi-
> > >>>>>> arm2: arm-linux-gnueabihf-
> > >>>>>> arm3: arm-linux-gnueabi-
> > >>>>>> arch64: aarch64-linux-gnu-
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [toolchain-alias]
> > >>>>>> arm: arm1
> > >>>>>> aarch64: aarch64
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> (I intended to change the "arm: arm1" line to point at arm1/2/3 based on
> > >>>>> which I wanted to use at a particular time).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> However, running "buildman --list-toolchains" and re-reading the docs
> > >>>>> shows me that the [toolchain] values are absolute directories that buildman
> > >>>>> searches for files named *-gcc:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>     - scanning path 'arm-none-gnueabi-'
> > >>>>>>        - looking in 'arm-none-gnueabi-/.'
> > >>>>>>        - looking in 'arm-none-gnueabi-/bin'
> > >>>>>>        - looking in 'arm-none-gnueabi-/usr/bin'
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> If buildman finds multiple toolchains, there doesn't seem to be a way to
> > >>>>> tell it which one to use. Am I missing something?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I suppose a solution wouuld be to move the compiler binaries into
> > >>>>> different separate directories, and only list one of those directories in
> > >>>>> ~/.buildman. However, I can't do that for distro-packaged toolchains (well,
> > >>>>> I suppose I could manually mv everything all over the place, but that's
> > >>>>> really fragile since it'd break any time the package got upgraded or removed
> > >>>>> and re-installed).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I think it makes sense to add new syntax into ~/.buildman to specify
> > >>>>> "don't do automagical searching, just use this CROSS_COMPILE value that I
> > >>>>> say". Does that sound reasonable? Automagic stuff makes for great defaults,
> > >>>>> but if it can't be overridden, it sucks when you actually know what you
> > >>>>> want.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Yes I think it would be fine to add an option to use CROSS_COMPILE (of
> > >>>> course it would fail if you tried to build the board with the wrong
> > >>>> arch).
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I wasn't necessarily looking for buildman to pick up the CROSS_COMPILE
> > >>> environment variable, although that would be a simple solution for
> > >>> single-arch builds at least. My mention of CROSS_COMPILE immediately above
> > >>> was re: using values that are formatted in the same way as the CROSS_COMPILE
> > >>> environment variable would be, rather than directory names, in the config
> > >>> file. In other words, the example content I showed above.
> > >>>
> > >>>> The option other option at present is -G which lets you use multiple
> > >>>> .buildman files. You could have one of these for each toolchain.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I don't think that gets me what I want. As far as I can tell, the buildman
> > >>> config file contains a list directories to search within, yet if I have 3
> > >>> toolchains in a single directory, there's no way to select which one I want
> > >>> to use, is there?
> > >>>
> > >>> In other words, a config file that contains:
> > >>>
> > >>> [toolchain]
> > >>> distro-packages: /usr/bin
> > >>>
> > >>> ... finds the following toolchains:
> > >>>
> > >>> [swarren at swarren-lx1 u-boot]$ ./tools/buildman/buildman \
> > >>>         --list-tool-chains
> > >>> Scanning for tool chains
> > >>>    - scanning path '/usr/bin'
> > >>>       - looking in '/usr/bin/.'
> > >>>          - found '/usr/bin/./arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc'
> > >>>          - found '/usr/bin/./arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc'
> > >>>          - found '/usr/bin/./arm-none-eabi-gcc'
> > >>> (That's 3 AArch32 toolchains found)
> > >>>          - found '/usr/bin/./winegcc'
> > >>>          - found '/usr/bin/./aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc'
> > >>>          - found '/usr/bin/./gcc'
> > >>>          - found '/usr/bin/./c89-gcc'
> > >>>          - found '/usr/bin/./x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc'
> > >>>          - found '/usr/bin/./i586-mingw32msvc-gcc'
> > >>>          - found '/usr/bin/./c99-gcc'
> > >>>       - looking in '/usr/bin/bin'
> > >>>       - looking in '/usr/bin/usr/bin'
> > >>> Tool chain test:  OK
> > >>> Tool chain test:  OK
> > >>> Tool chain test:  OK
> > >>> Tool chain test:  OK
> > >>> Tool chain test:  OK
> > >>> Tool chain test:  OK
> > >>> Tool chain test:  OK
> > >>> Tool chain test:  OK
> > >>> Tool chain test:  OK
> > >>> Tool chain test:  OK
> > >>> List of available toolchains (7):
> > >>> aarch64   : /usr/bin/./aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc
> > >>> arm       : /usr/bin/./arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc
> > >>> (Buildman chose that one, and I think I have no control over that?)
> > >>> c89       : /usr/bin/./c89-gcc
> > >>> c99       : /usr/bin/./c99-gcc
> > >>> i586      : /usr/bin/./i586-mingw32msvc-gcc
> > >>> sandbox   : /usr/bin/./winegcc
> > >>> x86_64    : /usr/bin/./x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc
> > >>
> > >> I wonder if we need an option to specify the full path and avoid the search?
> > >>
> > >> Maybe [toolchain-prefix] ?
> > >
> > > Yes, that sounds like exactly what I was hoping for.
> >
> > OK - would you like to do a patch?
>
> Please note that I think this feature is what we need to be able to drop
> MAKEALL support, it's the only use case I can find right now where we
> can do something in MAKEALL but not buildman.  Thanks!
>
> --
> Tom

I'll make time for this over the next few weeks.

Regards,
Simon