From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-gw0-f47.google.com ([74.125.83.47]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NxVmz-0007l1-0p for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 03:35:16 +0200 Received: by gwj21 with SMTP id 21so1100024gwj.6 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:31:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:cc:subject :message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=ceKKQS/+OpcjPkngRi9PsQTNw/meKTmIt4uDQmMiSRw=; b=Ie0BzD9yJbQnC2p6qxovOBUdtNNy3sn4y5CVkj7WkY9FSnptQnSAaPio4zuLUdnh1E mgpc75LJ4e/tHAXNkN8/D8itMNSoR7c7xjvimZWrpQErbA5uFBTFZsqy0n88sx4ONRVc +lVTyJ8EMpxOATChmdI4jz36KMbhVfR+lGNrs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=TWw4GucvIfH2mS+uicSlP5WtIiM+bCzA+AZtvVDB09Ez75H6UcKWwQjeFJAjREUv2V PHb+kQvqLnquIBYKvaHXSzAGQ3u9k99/RckCvthzpVRGV6B65hv8S3e7xIcolVWc34nM mI1DbQkpx7KaiGmEQHmg9CSLudQJtirHNsO3A= Received: by 10.101.167.36 with SMTP id u36mr4141495ano.171.1270171914258; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:31:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (99-57-141-118.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [99.57.141.118]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 21sm1311475iwn.3.2010.04.01.18.31.50 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:31:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:32:48 -0700 From: Khem Raj To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Message-ID: <20100402013248.GB6161@gmail.com> References: <20100401182116.GA27613@mx.loc> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100401182116.GA27613@mx.loc> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 74.125.83.47 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: raj.khem@gmail.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Cc: openembedded-users@linuxtogo.org Subject: Re: error building meta-toolchain for powerpc 405 X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 01:35:16 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On (01/04/10 20:21), Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 11:09:56AM -0500, Ryan Phillips wrote: > > >Patch attached... It looks like gcc-package-sdk needs to have the > >strips be optional. > > Apart from the question below, why not just invoke strip once for all of > them? > ${TARGET_PREFIX}strip ${D}${prefix}/${TARGET_SYS}/lib/*.so.* || : > > just curious.. While this is certainly possible, I am not in favor of using wildcards in this case because, its more explicit on what we want to strip and it also can tell us problems if a given .so was not built for some reason where we expected it to. > > > Is this the correct fix or should libstdc++ > >already exist? > > > >Related Commit: 8c4198fc > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel