Re: Bitbake Request for Testing of bitbake 1.8

[Mark Gross <markgross@thegnar.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2642 bytes --]

On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 09:55:31PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> I've been putting this off for a while but bitbake trunk has branched
> for a new stable release series, 1.8.x which will ultimately replace the
> 1.6.x stable series.
> 
> Could people give the 1.8 branch in bitbake a try? If you have problems,
> I will do my best to resolve them before 1.8.0 is released. I estimate
> 1.8.0 is say a week away, I want to release soon.
> 
> For what its worth, some of the core devs have been using trunk for a
> while with success and its been used in poky without incident for a
> while now too.
> 
> 
> What's will be new in 1.8?
> 
> * We basically rewrote half the core. Bitbake used to calculate the
> build path "on the fly" which was no use for multithreading, its now
> been replaced with a calculation in advance (taskdata and runqueue).
> This allows it to do simplistic multithreading. Set BB_NUMBER_THREADS =
> "100" in local.conf to lock your machine up or something lower to try
> multithreading ;-).
> 
> * The -g dependency graph output has changed and now includes a task
> dependency file. Has anyone got a good way to view these graphically
> yet?
> 
> * The fetchers were refactored removing duplicate code and standardising
> behaviour.
> 
> * Numerous code changes were made internally to refactor/modularise the
> code. This will be useful in future developments (the last code I
> checked in prepares for the UI).
> 
> 
> What will happen in trunk?
> 
> I've branched as I have some fairly invasive changes planned for trunk.
> The aim of these is to split bitbake into a client/server and look at
> UIs. Whilst 1.7.x was very stable more recently, 1.9.x is going to
> break ;-). 
> 
> The current UI code I have is about as secure as publishing your IP
> address and root password on the web and leaving the telnet port open so
> when I check it in, use at your own risk. I will accept patches to
> address these issues ;-). My main concern is the structure at the moment
> rather than security or functionality which can come later.
> 
> 
> So please do test the bitbake 1.8 branch and lets make it as successful
> as 1.6!
> 

FYI 1.8 built my modified slugos-image without any problems.  

E Build Configuration:
BB_VERSION     = "1.7.999"
OE_REVISION    = "f1ac1dc451ca12e3634137ddce1c0caf04f46ee9"
TARGET_ARCH    = "armeb"
TARGET_OS      = "linux"
MACHINE        = "nslu2be"
DISTRO         = "slugos"
DISTRO_VERSION = "4.3-beta"
TARGET_FPU     = "soft"


Are there special configurations or settings you would like to see
tried?

--mgross


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]