[PATCH v2 1/3] buildman: allow specifying configuration fragments

[Heinrich Schuchardt]

Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz at cherry.de> schrieb am Fr., 18. Apr. 2025,
15:52:

> Hi Simon,
>
> On 4/18/25 1:39 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Quentin,
> >
> > On Fri, 18 Apr 2025 at 05:27, Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz at cherry.de>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Heinrich,
> >>
> >> On 4/17/25 12:40 AM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> >>> Currently we are no able to build with configuration fragments in our
> CI.
> >>> With this patch buildman gets a new argument --fragments for passing a
> >>> comma separated list of configuration fragments to add to the board
> >>> defconfigs, e.g.
> >>>
> >>>       tools/buildman/buildman \
> >>>       -o build \
> >>>       -k qemu-riscv64_smode \
> >>>       --fragments acpi.config
> >>>
> >>
> >> What about using:
> >>
> >> --fragment acpi.config --fragment fragment2.config
>

Why should we type so much?

--fragments fragment1.config,fragment2.config is shorter.


>>
> >> ?
> >
> > Yes that could be useful. It would also allow wildcards, although the
>

Wildcards would be matter of the Makefile.

> code would need to drop the config/ directory prefix. Also, I see that
> > -z is available so perhaps that could be a (bad) short option?
> >
>
> I really dislike short options, but whatever floats your boat :)
>
> > Another idea would be to also allow specifying the fragment name
> > without the '.config' suffix. Less to type.
> >


We can follow all those ideas in future patches. But first let us see the
first test running in CI with acpi.config. ACPI is what we have broken
again and again due to missing test builds.

Best regards

Heinrich


>
> It's actually a fair point, we do already strip the _defconfig suffix,
> and it seems config fragments are necessarily suffixed by .config, so I
> believe this is fair.


> Cheers,
> Quentin
>