mpy-cross/Makefile: Also undefine MICROPY_FORCE_32BIT and CROSS_COMPILE. #3987
Conversation
mpy-cross is a host, not target binary. It should not be build with the
target compiler, compiler options and other settings. For example,
If someone currently tries to build from pristine checkout the unix port
with the following command:
make CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabihf-
then mpy-cross will be built with arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc and of course
won't run on the host, leading to overall build failure.
This situation was worked around for some options in 1d8c3f4, so add
MICROPY_FORCE_32BIT and CROSS_COMPILE to that set too.
|
#3255 keeps giving bad surprises. Note that workaround with "override undefine" is pretty poor. How it should work is:
The right place to do that would be: That invocation of $(MAKE) should not get any vars passed to the top-level make on the command line. https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Options_002fRecursion.html says that MAKEFLAGS= should do the trick, but: didn't work as expected for me. But of course works, though a bunch of options would need to be passed. Another way is to explicitly define HOST_CC, HOST_CFLAGS, HOST_CROSS_COMPILE, etc. and use that in mpy-cross/Makefile. |
|
https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Variables_002fRecursion.html
I.e. resetting MAKEFLAGS is not enough, because if run like |
I don't think this approach will work for variables that are either set if they aren't already set (eg |
|
Well, maybe it won't work for everything, but is already used in a number of places and works well there, e.g. https://github.com/micropython/micropython/blob/master/ports/unix/Makefile#L212 The "right" way is definitely yo define HOST_* vars for CC, CFLAGS, etc., but it's very verbose and likely will be cumbersome. And in either case, this patch provides minimal changes required to cross-build uPy with fresh checkout or during development (because any change to py/* will also trigger rebuild of mpy-cross, if CC is cross-compiler, kaboom). |
|
(For reference, CI failure, with "coverage/coveralls — Coverage decreased (-0.006%)" is apparently a glitch.) |
Yes, agreed. Merged in ab78fe0 |
mpy-cross is a host, not target binary. It should not be build with the
target compiler, compiler options and other settings. For example,
If someone currently tries to build from pristine checkout the unix port
with the following command:
then mpy-cross will be built with arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc and of course
won't run on the host, leading to overall build failure.
This situation was worked around for some options in 1d8c3f4, so add
MICROPY_FORCE_32BIT and CROSS_COMPILE to that set too.