Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Rationalize Travis builds #3218
Rationalize Travis builds #3218
Changes from 19 commits
97bea01
60f267b
c9cdd21
d0f543a
b49a457
a38f368
3c7ffd7
dc56675
a2d3ec2
a5ced5b
5dcfb94
f2f39dd
129d041
af387e0
a4a8f04
0402510
23d249a
b97a044
10cb160
6d06134
6537588
6e2fb86
18487f6
907211d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Because of this change, change the name of the component? component_build_arm_gcc(_cross_compiler) ?
Same comment for the components below.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure, and I'd prefer to defer such a change to when we know how we'll use this feature. If we'll use this feature.
I initially did this because I thought it would be necessary to use a different compiler on Travis to avoid having to install
arm-none-eabi-gcc
. But it turned out that the compiler we're using on Jenkins is from Ubuntu, so it was straightforward to add this compiler. I left the commit in because even if it isn't necessary now, it could be useful later.There are two ways this can be used: to substitute a different platform, or to use a compiler installed at a location outside
$PATH
. For the first use case, we should have different component names. For the second use case, the component should keep its name. My current preference is to declare that the second use case is the one that's primarily intended, and so keep the component names.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, I am not really convinced. If ${ARM_GCC_PREFIX} is set up to a value that has nothing to do with arm_none_eabi_gcc then the component has nothing to do with arm_none_eabi_gcc but is called component_build_arm_none_eabi_gcc () which is confusing to me.
Regarding the second use case, making the path to arm_none_eabi_gcc configurable would be enough it seems.
I understand that we are not completely committed to the second use case thus the idea to let it not very well defined yet. But we then go from a situation where things are clear to a situation where things are unclear: the component is named component_build_arm_none_eabi_gcc () but it may not use at all arm_none_eabi_gcc compiler.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How about renaming
ARM_GCC_PREFIX
toARM_NONE_EABI_GCC_PREFIX
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, it would be fine by me with this renaming.