Re: [edk2-devel] BaseTools/BinWrappers question?

["Andrew Fish" <afish@apple.com>]

> On Aug 19, 2019, at 6:09 AM, Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> Andrew:
>  This is the history reason. Before, Edk2 BaseTools included the binary Windows tools in BaseTools\Bin\Win32. There is no BaseTools/BinWrappers/WindowsLike directory. 
> 
>  When migrate BaseTools Windows tools from binary to source build, Edk2 BaseTools C source is still compiled to BaseTools\Bin\Win32 directory. Because BaseTools\Bin\Win32 is set into system PATH env, there is no requirement to add their wrapper scripts in BaseTools/BinWrappers/WindowsLike directory.
> 

Liming,

Thanks for the answer, I was guessing it was related to the history difference with the tools. 

I ran some experiments years ago and calling the C function through the bash script seemed to take up 5% of the build time. Would it make sense to use a path for Unix builds too vs. the wrappers? 

Thanks,

Andrew Fish

> Thanks
> Liming
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: devel@edk2.groups.io [mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io] On Behalf Of Andrew Fish via Groups.Io
>> Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2019 1:01 AM
>> To: devel@edk2.groups.io
>> Subject: [edk2-devel] BaseTools/BinWrappers question?
>> 
>> Why does BaseTools/BinWrappers/WindowsLike only have wrappers for Python commands, while  BaseTools/BinWrappers/PosixLike has
>> wrappers for C based tools too?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Andrew Fish
>> 
> 
> 
> 
>