1.3_M5.rc2 status.

1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Flanagan, Elizabeth]

All,

1.3_M5.rc2 was started a bit late today due to some miscommunication.
The build has begun and judging from recent autobuilder performance,
I'm expecting it to complete in about six and a half hours from now.
For those doing QA against 1.3_M5.rc2, if you can, please begin
testing what you can as soon as build artifacts become available.

Download: http://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/pub/nightly/20120926-1
poky: 718eb85806e080d0b165344b272e531ef19421eb
meta-qt3: 8730326c902e6fb256b5dea77a6dde28d813c424
eclipse-poky: c88444d96958324e7dda9bd496977be3369aea1e

Thanks,

-b

-- 
Elizabeth Flanagan
Yocto Project
Build and Release

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear "Flanagan, Elizabeth",

In message <CAPhnLPCYC9_xvdinu9=prhUOz8FfquYK5TVrBKiHLZ4FyK267g@mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
> 
> 1.3_M5.rc2 was started a bit late today due to some miscommunication.
> The build has begun and judging from recent autobuilder performance,
> I'm expecting it to complete in about six and a half hours from now.
> For those doing QA against 1.3_M5.rc2, if you can, please begin
> testing what you can as soon as build artifacts become available.
> 
> Download: http://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/pub/nightly/20120926-1
> poky: 718eb85806e080d0b165344b272e531ef19421eb

This commit has:

meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf:LAYER_CONF_VERSION ?= "6"

But:

meta/conf/sanity.conf:LAYER_CONF_VERSION ?= "5"


So for me the sanity checker bails out with:

ERROR:  OE-core's config sanity checker detected a potential misconfiguration.
    Either fix the cause of this error or at your own risk disable the checker (see sanity.conf).
    Following is the list of potential problems / advisories:

    Your version of bblayers.conf was generated from an older version of bblayers.conf.sample and there have been updates made to this file. Please compare the two files and merge any changes before continuing.
Matching the version numbers will remove this message.
"meld conf/bblayers.conf /home/wd/git/eldk-5.3/meta*/conf/bblayers.conf.sample" is a good way to visualise the changes.

ERROR: Execution of event handler 'check_sanity_eventhandler' failed


Am I doing anyhting wrong?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
Insufficient facts always invite danger.
	-- Spock, "Space Seed", stardate 3141.9

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Paul Eggleton]

Hi Wolfgang,

On Wednesday 26 September 2012 13:39:00 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> This commit has:
> 
> meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf:LAYER_CONF_VERSION ?= "6"
> 
> But:
> 
> meta/conf/sanity.conf:LAYER_CONF_VERSION ?= "5"
> 
> 
> So for me the sanity checker bails out with:
> 
> ERROR:  OE-core's config sanity checker detected a potential
> misconfiguration. Either fix the cause of this error or at your own risk
> disable the checker (see sanity.conf). Following is the list of potential
> problems / advisories:
> 
>     Your version of bblayers.conf was generated from an older version of
> bblayers.conf.sample and there have been updates made to this file. Please
> compare the two files and merge any changes before continuing. Matching the
> version numbers will remove this message.
> "meld conf/bblayers.conf
> /home/wd/git/eldk-5.3/meta*/conf/bblayers.conf.sample" is a good way to
> visualise the changes.
> 
> ERROR: Execution of event handler 'check_sanity_eventhandler' failed
> 
> 
> Am I doing anyhting wrong?

No, this is expected, at the moment you need to follow the instructions and 
make the appropriate changes to your conf/bblayers.conf. However, there is a 
patch out for review that we would like to include for the 1.3 final release 
which will take care of this automatically for you.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Paul Eggleton,

In message <10067256.0vCsjtRvv5@helios> you wrote:
> 
> > Am I doing anyhting wrong?
> 
> No, this is expected, at the moment you need to follow the instructions and 
> make the appropriate changes to your conf/bblayers.conf. However, there is a 
> patch out for review that we would like to include for the 1.3 final release 
> which will take care of this automatically for you.

Thanks.  Please excuse my ignorance: where would I find the respective
instructions?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
Misquotation is, in fact, the pride and privilege of the  learned.  A
widely-read  man  never  quotes  accurately,  for  the rather obvious
reason that he has read too widely.
                - Hesketh Pearson _Common Misquotations_ introduction

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Paul Eggleton]

On Wednesday 26 September 2012 15:06:53 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > this is expected, at the moment you need to follow the instructions
> > and make the appropriate changes to your conf/bblayers.conf. However,
> > there is a patch out for review that we would like to include for the 1.3
> > final release which will take care of this automatically for you.
> 
> Thanks.  Please excuse my ignorance: where would I find the respective
> instructions?

It does have some very brief instructions in the error message:

> > > Please compare the two files and merge any changes before continuing.
> > > Matching the version numbers will remove this message.
> > > "meld conf/bblayers.conf  
> > > /home/wd/git/eldk-5.3/meta*/conf/bblayers.conf.sample" is a good way
> > > to visualise the changes.

I appreciate this is not as helpful as it could be, hence why we are working 
to do this automatically for the user.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Paul,

In message <1767865.bvfduhkKG5@helios> you wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 September 2012 15:06:53 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > > this is expected, at the moment you need to follow the instructions
> > > and make the appropriate changes to your conf/bblayers.conf. However,
> > > there is a patch out for review that we would like to include for the 1.3
> > > final release which will take care of this automatically for you.
> > 
> > Thanks.  Please excuse my ignorance: where would I find the respective
> > instructions?
> 
> It does have some very brief instructions in the error message:
> 
> > > > Please compare the two files and merge any changes before continuing.
> > > > Matching the version numbers will remove this message.
> > > > "meld conf/bblayers.conf  
> > > > /home/wd/git/eldk-5.3/meta*/conf/bblayers.conf.sample" is a good way
> > > > to visualise the changes.
> 
> I appreciate this is not as helpful as it could be, hence why we are working 
> to do this automatically for the user.

Ah, OK.  Well, I decided to update meta/conf/sanity.conf to have a
matching value of LAYER_CONF_VERSION, so this is solved.

Sorry, I misinterpreted your note and expected any additional
instructions for building 1.3_M5

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
In the pitiful, multipage, connection-boxed form to which  the  flow-
chart  has  today  been  elaborated, it has proved to be useless as a
design tool -- programmers draw flowcharts after, not before, writing
the programs they describe.                        - Fred Brooks, Jr.

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Paul Eggleton]

On Wednesday 26 September 2012 15:28:51 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <1767865.bvfduhkKG5@helios> you wrote:
> > On Wednesday 26 September 2012 15:06:53 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > > > this is expected, at the moment you need to follow the instructions
> > > > and make the appropriate changes to your conf/bblayers.conf. However,
> > > > there is a patch out for review that we would like to include for the
> > > > 1.3
> > > > final release which will take care of this automatically for you.
> > > 
> > > Thanks.  Please excuse my ignorance: where would I find the respective
> > > instructions?
> > 
> > It does have some very brief instructions in the error message:
> > > > > Please compare the two files and merge any changes before
> > > > > continuing.
> > > > > Matching the version numbers will remove this message.
> > > > > "meld conf/bblayers.conf
> > > > > /home/wd/git/eldk-5.3/meta*/conf/bblayers.conf.sample" is a good way
> > > > > to visualise the changes.
> > 
> > I appreciate this is not as helpful as it could be, hence why we are
> > working to do this automatically for the user.
> 
> Ah, OK.  Well, I decided to update meta/conf/sanity.conf to have a
> matching value of LAYER_CONF_VERSION, so this is solved.

That will work, but normally you would edit conf/bblayers.conf, since 
meta/conf/sanity.conf is part of the metadata.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Paul Eggleton,

In message <2428256.OTjtN2nWn5@helios> you wrote:
>
> > Ah, OK.  Well, I decided to update meta/conf/sanity.conf to have a
> > matching value of LAYER_CONF_VERSION, so this is solved.
> 
> That will work, but normally you would edit conf/bblayers.conf, since 
> meta/conf/sanity.conf is part of the metadata.

Well, what is the rationale for setting LAYER_CONF_VERSION=6 in
meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf, then?

If meta layer specific values of LAYER_CONF_VERSION are allowed, the
sanity checker needs a better way to deal with these; alternatively,
above setting in meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf is wrong.  So either
of these should be fixed.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
Build a system that even a fool can use and only a fool will want  to
use it.

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Chris Larson]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de> wrote:
> In message <2428256.OTjtN2nWn5@helios> you wrote:
>>
>> > Ah, OK.  Well, I decided to update meta/conf/sanity.conf to have a
>> > matching value of LAYER_CONF_VERSION, so this is solved.
>>
>> That will work, but normally you would edit conf/bblayers.conf, since
>> meta/conf/sanity.conf is part of the metadata.
>
> Well, what is the rationale for setting LAYER_CONF_VERSION=6 in
> meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf, then?
>
> If meta layer specific values of LAYER_CONF_VERSION are allowed, the
> sanity checker needs a better way to deal with these; alternatively,
> above setting in meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf is wrong.  So either
> of these should be fixed.

They're both set exactly the way they should be. You're only affected
by the bblayers compatibility change if you use poky, as far as I'm
aware.
-- 
Christopher Larson

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Paul Eggleton]

On Wednesday 26 September 2012 16:20:45 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Paul Eggleton,
> In message <2428256.OTjtN2nWn5@helios> you wrote:
> > > Ah, OK.  Well, I decided to update meta/conf/sanity.conf to have a
> > > matching value of LAYER_CONF_VERSION, so this is solved.
> > 
> > That will work, but normally you would edit conf/bblayers.conf, since
> > meta/conf/sanity.conf is part of the metadata.
> 
> Well, what is the rationale for setting LAYER_CONF_VERSION=6 in
> meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf, then?

The rationale is for this specific increase is this: if you previously had 
meta-yocto in your existing bblayers.conf, since the reference BSP parts of 
meta-yocto were split out into meta-yocto-bsp for the upcoming release, you 
now need to add that layer to get the same functionality back. So we use this 
mechanism to get users to do that.
 
> If meta layer specific values of LAYER_CONF_VERSION are allowed, the
> sanity checker needs a better way to deal with these; alternatively,
> above setting in meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf is wrong.  So either
> of these should be fixed.

By "better way to deal with these", what would you suggest? I don't see any 
alternative that avoids the BSP components just disappearing for users who 
have existing configurations.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Paul,

In message <224780988.1nyHnvScgz@helios> you wrote:
>
> > If meta layer specific values of LAYER_CONF_VERSION are allowed, the
> > sanity checker needs a better way to deal with these; alternatively,
> > above setting in meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf is wrong.  So either
> > of these should be fixed.
> 
> By "better way to deal with these", what would you suggest? I don't see any 
> alternative that avoids the BSP components just disappearing for users who 
> have existing configurations.

Well, the comment in  "meta-yocto/conf/bblayers.conf.sample"  says:

	# LAYER_CONF_VERSION is increased each time build/conf/bblayers.conf
	# changes incompatibly

This suggests that such changes are not exactly unusual.  But any such
change will cause the build to fail, because the sanity checker uses a
different value.

If such a change is allowed and is done intentionally, then it should
be considered "sane", and the sanity checker should not complain.

The problem (and the longer I think about it the less I hesitate to
call it a plain bug) is that we allow for meta layer specific values
of LAYER_CONF_VERSION, while still assuming a single hard-coded
value in  meta/conf/sanity.conf  could be used as reference.

This _cannot_ work.

But when I'm supposed to overwrite the setting (to match the sanity
checker's expectations) in my local conf/bblayers.conf, then why do we
bother to set a dieferent value in the meta layer in the first place?
And hey, why do we check this value at all if all we can do is always
make it match manually?

I understand the intention, but the current implementation is just
broken, and I don't see a way to fix it.  It would probably be better
to remove this test than to leave it as is.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
If a packet hits a pocket on a socket on a port,
And the bus is interrupted as a very last resort,
And the address of the memory makes your floppy disk abort,
Then the socket packet pocket has an error to report! - Ken Burchill?

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Chris Larson]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de> wrote:
>> By "better way to deal with these", what would you suggest? I don't see any
>> alternative that avoids the BSP components just disappearing for users who
>> have existing configurations.
>
> Well, the comment in  "meta-yocto/conf/bblayers.conf.sample"  says:
>
>         # LAYER_CONF_VERSION is increased each time build/conf/bblayers.conf
>         # changes incompatibly
>
> This suggests that such changes are not exactly unusual.  But any such
> change will cause the build to fail, because the sanity checker uses a
> different value.

This is wrong. A compatibility break in bblayers.conf is *extremely* rare.

> If such a change is allowed and is done intentionally, then it should
> be considered "sane", and the sanity checker should not complain.

Wrong. The user has to know that they may need to change their
bblayers.conf to match the upstream structure. If it didn't complain,
they could silently break or encounter unexpected behavior.

> The problem (and the longer I think about it the less I hesitate to
> call it a plain bug) is that we allow for meta layer specific values
> of LAYER_CONF_VERSION, while still assuming a single hard-coded
> value in  meta/conf/sanity.conf  could be used as reference.
>
> This _cannot_ work.
>
> But when I'm supposed to overwrite the setting (to match the sanity
> checker's expectations) in my local conf/bblayers.conf, then why do we
> bother to set a dieferent value in the meta layer in the first place?
> And hey, why do we check this value at all if all we can do is always
> make it match manually?

Not everyone using oe-core (meta) also uses meta-yocto. Only those
using the latter were affected by this particular upstream structure
change.

> I understand the intention, but the current implementation is just
> broken, and I don't see a way to fix it.  It would probably be better
> to remove this test than to leave it as is.

Again, that'd leave the user with a bblayers.conf that may no longer
do what they intended it to do. Better to fail than potentially build
in ways not matching the user's previous expectations.
-- 
Christopher Larson

Re: 1.3_M5.rc2 status.

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Chris,

In message <CABcZANmPe_D+GPWxnkVZCmE9ti011ZDSXxPix8ztW4vrdYiyZA@mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> > Well, the comment in  "meta-yocto/conf/bblayers.conf.sample"  says:
> >
> >         # LAYER_CONF_VERSION is increased each time build/conf/bblayers.conf
> >         # changes incompatibly
> >
> > This suggests that such changes are not exactly unusual.  But any such
> > change will cause the build to fail, because the sanity checker uses a
> > different value.
> 
> This is wrong. A compatibility break in bblayers.conf is *extremely* rare.
> 
> > If such a change is allowed and is done intentionally, then it should
> > be considered "sane", and the sanity checker should not complain.
> 
> Wrong. The user has to know that they may need to change their
> bblayers.conf to match the upstream structure. If it didn't complain,
> they could silently break or encounter unexpected behavior.

Sorry, but I don't get how this is supposed to work.

I have an incompatible change, and increase LAYER_CONF_VERSION in my
meta layer's bblayers.conf.sample .  When sourcing oe-init-build-env,
this file gets copied to the build dir as conf/bblayers.conf.
Building with this setting fails, because the samity checker does not
accept the value.  So I have to actually undo the change I made in
bblayers.conf.sample to make it build.

My internal sanity checker barfs on such logic...

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
"Tell the truth and run."                          - Yugoslav proverb