[syslinux] gnu-efi submodule WAS: efi: Makefile improvement

Ady ady-sf at hotmail.com
Wed Sep 16 12:51:24 PDT 2015


> >>>
>  > How about
>  > 1) Laying every needed versions of gnu-efi under its own directory where
>  > its name could be just the version.
>  > 2) Defining the gnu-efi version to use in a Makefile variable; if the source
>  > is not present then the Makefile triggers the corresponding
>  > "check out" with git.
>  
>  > The original tarball will contain (not check out needed )the source of the
>  > gnu-efi version used for the
>  > corresponding build. But just changing a Makefile variable we would be able
>  > to build against the different
>  > gnu-efi versions with 0 hassle.
>  >
>  > What do you guys think? Could this be done?
>  
>  Not sure I like the idea of accumulating the versions of gnu-efi.
>  That'd make one submodule per version that has been used at 
> some point in history.
>  And when you work on it and want to just test several of versions of
>  gnu-efi (that are not yet registered as submodule), that'd be annoying
>  to have to patch the makefile and add a new submodule everytime.
>  The submodule repository would have to be cloned from the network, which
>  can be long.
>  
>  For the problem of the tarball sources, we could only perform the "git
>  submodule update --init" if this is a git repository.
>  
>  Celelibi
>  <<<
> 
> 1) Gnu-efi sources are about 139 KB then I do not think it would be much of a problem
> having more than one submodule version under the Syslinux building tree. Also the non-used
> versions could be easily removed when invoking "#make spotless".
> 
> 2) Cloning from the net shouldn't be that bad considering the involved sizes, plus it is done 
> only once for every version.
> 
> 3) Testing versions not registered as submodule yet could be easily done
> w/o touching the makefiles just by i.e. overwriting the content of the last version submodule 
> directory with the sources being tested.
> 
> 4) I think this approach makes very easy testing different gnu-efi versions; today doing this
> is a real PITA.
> 
> Just my 2 cents.
> 
> Best,
> Patrick
 
With all due respect, I have the feeling we might be putting too much 
effort / resources on the gnu-efi code used in Syslinux. I wouldn't 
even call this "my opinion", but if you would, then please add "in my 
very very very humble opinion".

Although I don't like the fact that we are currently based on an old 
(2014FEB) commit of the gnu-efi code:
 sf.net/p/gnu-efi/code/ci/ab54e2b40e914d0ca01dc3d44c8d4eb8517bf999

and although I also don't like the relative difficulty to change to 
another gnu-efi commit (emphasize on "commit", not "version"), I would 
tend to think that adding / replicating gnu-efi code is not much of a 
gain, while it would take already-limited resources.

I have read posts (here in the Syslinux Mailing List, and elsewhere) 
about this matter, such as not being able to use the gnu-efi code 
already installed on the system, or a different version/commit, or to 
avoid using git and to use some other format (such as a tar archive)... 
If we were to consider such comments / situations, adding an additional 
git repo or additional sub-directories would seem even worse under some 
perspective.

Considering that The Syslinux Project recommends, generally speaking, 
using official binaries, and considering also that reproducing certain 
behaviors would be more difficult if we were to be using different 
bases for the gnu-efi code, perhaps we should not be "easing" the 
possibility of changing such code (i.e. the gnu-efi commit on which 
Syslinux builds upon).

I would like to see, after "6.04-pre1" (whenever it would be 
appropriate and when the changelog deserves it) an update of the 
gnu-efi commit we are based on. Then we could see a "6.04-pre2", so we 
can test any potential difference. Alternatively, a separated branch in 
git, updated in parallel to the master branch, with a newer gnu-efi 
commit as base (instead of using the old one from 2014FEB), for tests 
and comparisons, could be perhaps an option.

Regards,
Ady. 

> _______________________________________________
> Syslinux mailing list
> Submissions to Syslinux at zytor.com
> Unsubscribe or set options at:
> http://www.zytor.com/mailman/listinfo/syslinux
> 




More information about the Syslinux mailing list