Re: [PATCH] tools: Add install/uninstall targets to tests/x86_emulator

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 16.05.2024 14:29, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
> On 16/05/2024 12:35, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 12:07:10PM +0100, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
>>> Bring test_x86_emulator in line with other tests by adding
>>> install/uninstall rules.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.vallejo@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile | 11 +++++++++--
>>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile 
>>> b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile
>>> index 834b2112e7fe..30edf7e0185d 100644
>>> --- a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile
>>> +++ b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile
>>> @@ -269,8 +269,15 @@ clean:
>>>  .PHONY: distclean
>>>  distclean: clean
>>>  
>>> -.PHONY: install uninstall
>>> -install uninstall:
>>> +.PHONY: install
>>> +install: all
>>> +   $(INSTALL_DIR) $(DESTDIR)$(LIBEXEC_BIN)
>>> +   $(if $(TARGET-y),$(INSTALL_PROG) $(TARGET-y) $(DESTDIR)$(LIBEXEC_BIN))
>>> +
>>> +.PHONY: uninstall
>>> +uninstall:
>>> +   $(RM) -- $(addprefix $(DESTDIR)$(LIBEXEC_BIN)/,$(TARGET-y))
>>> +
>>
>> FWIW, should you check that HOSTCC == CC before installing?  Otherwise
>> I'm unsure of the result in cross-compiled builds, as the x86_emulator
>> is built with HOSTCC, not CC.
>>
>> Thanks, Roger.
> 
> Right...
> 
> More generally, should we do s/CC/HOSTCC/ on all compiler checks? I see
> no particular reason to do them on $(CC) rather than the actual compiler
> used during build.

No. There really is a mix here, intentionally. Anything built through 
testcase.mk
is using CC, and hence respective checking needs to use CC, too. That said, I
don't think the split is done quite correctly just yet, which may raise the
question of whether having the split is actually worth it.

Jan