[edk2] [RFC] Remove unused tool chain configuration in BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template
hiberhe at 163.com
Tue Dec 11 17:02:27 PST 2018
I think it's better to separate different toolchains in different files and use "include" to include them. This can significantly reduce the difficulty of maintenance and anyone who still wants/has to use older toolchains can have a chance to follow the edk2-master.
Old toolchains can be marked as obsolete and deprecated, and be removed after the change. The person who still want to use it is responsible for maintaining and fixing bugs he found from then on.
This can aslo make it easier to add personal changes and future toolchains. The current "tools_def.template" is too huge and complicated.
I remember that someone should have suggested it before.
On 12/10/2018 20:38, Gao, Liming wrote:
Thanks for your suggestion. I will work out the patch set serials to remove those tool chains. I don't remember the usage model of UNIXGCC. II will wait for Rebecca response.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Lindholm [mailto:leif.lindholm at linaro.org]
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2018 7:57 PM
> To: Gao, Liming <liming.gao at intel.com>
> Cc: edk2-devel at lists.01.org; Laszlo Ersek (lersek at redhat.com) <lersek at redhat.com>; afish at apple.com; Kinney, Michael D
> <michael.d.kinney at intel.com>; Rebecca Cran <rebecca at bluestop.org>
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove unused tool chain configuration in BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 02:42:35PM +0000, Gao, Liming wrote:
> > Hi, all
> > tools_def.template includes all tool chains. Some are not used any
> > more. And, there is no verification for them. So, I propose to
> > remove them. They are VS2003, VS2005, VS2008, VS2010, DDK3790,
> > UNIXGCC, GCC44, GCC45, GCC46, GCC47, ELFGCC, CYGGCC, ICC, ICC11,
> > MYTOOLS. If you still use some one of them, please let me know.
> This sounds good to me.
> However, may I suggest splitting this up into several patches, such
> that if we need to revert one of the deletions, we would not need to
> reinstate all of them.
> I would propose:
> - One patch for VS20nn
> - One patch for GCCnn
> - One patch for UNIXGCC, ELFGCC, CYGGCC
> I can't really judge what a suitable mashup/split between DDK3790,
> ICC, ICC11, and MYTOOLS would be.
> On a sidenote, I think Rebecca said at least FreeBSD were using
> UNIXGCC(?) since the plain GCC toolchain profiles did not support
> cross compiling. I am pretty sure that is not accurate these days -
> did you look into that after the community call?
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel at lists.01.org
More information about the edk2-devel