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

[Heinrich Schuchardt]

Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz at cherry.de> schrieb am Fr., 18. Apr. 2025,
16:33:

> Hi Heinrich,
>
> On 4/18/25 4:17 PM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> > 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.
> >
> >
>
> What was suggested by Simon after is:
>
> --fragment acpi --fragment fragment2
>
> vs
>
> --fragments acpi.config,fragment2.config
>
> Shorter :) (until we have more fragments, and then the added --fragment
> is an issue :)
>
> But also because I like to use argparse features instead of reinventing
> the wheel, but that's also not a big issue :)
>
> >>> 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
>
> No, this is user interface, we want to change it as little as possible.
> I don't think it makes sense to support --fragments
> fragment.config,fragment2.config now to then switch to --fragment
> fragment --fragment fragment2 later on, if that's what we want.
>
> Cheers,
> Quentin


Why do want to type more? I don't.

Best regards

Heinrich

>