[4/9] docs/manual: document gcc version dependencies

This commit updates the Buildroot manual to document how to detail the
gcc version dependencies in Config.in comments of packages, like we do
for kernel headers version.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
---
 docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

Thomas, All,

On 2015-08-04 20:00 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> This commit updates the Buildroot manual to document how to detail the
> gcc version dependencies in Config.in comments of packages, like we do
> for kernel headers version.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>

Reviewed-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>

However, see a comment below...

> ---
>  docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt b/docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt
> index 8f585d4..b66e447 100644
> --- a/docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt
> +++ b/docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt
> @@ -277,6 +277,12 @@ use in the comment.
>  ** Comment string: +headers >= X.Y+ and/or `headers <= X.Y` (replace
>     +X.Y+ with the proper version)
>  
> +* GCC version
> +** Dependency symbol: +BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_X_Y+, (replace
> +   +X_Y+ with the proper version, see +toolchain/toolchain-common.in+)
> +** Comment string: +gcc >= X.Y+ and/or `gcc <= X.Y` (replace

One of the condition is between ++ and the other between ``. I konow you
just replicated what was done for the kernel headers, but wuld it not be
better to use only ++ (or only ``, I don't mind) but not both?

And fix the kernel one at the same time, maybe (or in a separate patch)?

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

> +   +X.Y+ with the proper version)
> +
>  * C library
>  ** Dependency symbol: +BR2_TOOLCHAIN_USES_GLIBC+,
>     +BR2_TOOLCHAIN_USES_MUSL+, +BR2_TOOLCHAIN_USES_UCLIBC+
> -- 
> 2.5.0
> 
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot@busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Dear Yann E. MORIN,

On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 21:58:58 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote:

> > +* GCC version
> > +** Dependency symbol: +BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_X_Y+, (replace
> > +   +X_Y+ with the proper version, see +toolchain/toolchain-common.in+)
> > +** Comment string: +gcc >= X.Y+ and/or `gcc <= X.Y` (replace
> 
> One of the condition is between ++ and the other between ``. I konow you
> just replicated what was done for the kernel headers, but wuld it not be
> better to use only ++ (or only ``, I don't mind) but not both?

There is actually a good reason for that: if you use +...+ for +gcc <=
X.Y+, then the <= gets replaced by the <= mathematic character rather
than being the two characters < and =.

So I've kept the special use of `...` for the time being.

Thanks!

Thomas

Thomas, All,

On 2015-08-05 11:05 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 21:58:58 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> > > +* GCC version
> > > +** Dependency symbol: +BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_X_Y+, (replace
> > > +   +X_Y+ with the proper version, see +toolchain/toolchain-common.in+)
> > > +** Comment string: +gcc >= X.Y+ and/or `gcc <= X.Y` (replace
> > 
> > One of the condition is between ++ and the other between ``. I konow you
> > just replicated what was done for the kernel headers, but wuld it not be
> > better to use only ++ (or only ``, I don't mind) but not both?
> 
> There is actually a good reason for that: if you use +...+ for +gcc <=
> X.Y+, then the <= gets replaced by the <= mathematic character rather
> than being the two characters < and =.

Ah, right. Now I remember why they were different. Still, we should not
mix the two possibilities, and just use `` since that's what works.

> So I've kept the special use of `...` for the time being.

Yep, good.

I'll prepare a patch to fix that.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.