From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from vms173021pub.verizon.net (vms173021pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.21]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85C616B819 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:59:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gandalf.denix.org ([unknown] [71.191.205.189]) by vms173021.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0N35003FMRC01DW0@vms173021.mailsrvcs.net> for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 13:00:01 -0500 (CDT) Received: by gandalf.denix.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A6CB12036F; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:00:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:00:00 -0400 From: Denys Dmytriyenko To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Message-id: <20140328180000.GM3370@denix.org> References: <1394227575-27897-1-git-send-email-lauren.post@freescale.com> MIME-version: 1.0 In-reply-to: <1394227575-27897-1-git-send-email-lauren.post@freescale.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Subject: Re: [meta-oe][PATCH 1/7] linuxptp: Create 1.4 version X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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, 28 Mar 2014 18:00:00 -0000 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 03:26:09PM -0600, Lauren Post wrote: > Precision Time Protocol (PTP) according to IEEE standard 1588 Heh, another instance of "duplication" - I also have a similar recipe in my layer... Well, I do understand that "the early bird gets the worm" or the first submitter gets his change merged, but let me point out few issues: > Signed-off-by: Lauren Post > --- > .../recipes-connectivity/linuxptp/linuxptp_1.4.bb | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/linuxptp/linuxptp_1.4.bb > > diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/linuxptp/linuxptp_1.4.bb b/meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/linuxptp/linuxptp_1.4.bb > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..c708b13 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/linuxptp/linuxptp_1.4.bb > @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ > +DESCRIPTION = "Precision Time Protocol (PTP) according to IEEE standard 1588 for Linux" > +LICENSE = "GPLv2" > +LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=b234ee4d69f5fce4486a80fdaf4a4263" > + > +DEPENDS = "virtual/kernel" > + > +SRC_URI = "http://sourceforge.net/projects/linuxptp/files/v${PV}/linuxptp-${PV}.tgz" > + > +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "a37ad2b2ef7d1ebc4d64a66d3fe55cdf" > +SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "6cfd5291fb7394cc9f25458927874a203971b66b76d1c9d6568e007d0cbd81f2" > + > +inherit autotools pkgconfig It's easy to see that linuxptp build doesn't really use autotools or pkgconfig > +EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'KBUILD_OUTPUT="${STAGING_KERNEL_DIR}" CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}"' > + > +do_configure_append () { > + find ${S} -name makefile | xargs sed -i 's,^\(CC\|CFLAGS\|prefix\|AR\)=,\1 ?=,g' Why do you need to mangle the makefile? Passing CROSS_COMPILE and maybe ARCH should be enough, isn't it? > +} > + > +do_install () { > + install -d ${D}/${bindir} > + install -p ${S}/ptp4l ${D}/${bindir} > + install -p ${S}/pmc ${D}/${bindir} > + install -p ${S}/phc2sys ${D}/${bindir} > + install -p ${S}/hwstamp_ctl ${D}/${bindir} > +} And the last bit about dependency on virtual/kernel above and passing KBUILD_OUTPUT=STAGING_KERNEL_DIR to the build - I have looked into what that does and it tries to locate the correct /usr/include/linux/net_tstamp.h just to see if it contains definition for HWTSTAMP_TX_ONESTEP_SYNC. But that header file hasn't changed in at least 5 years. Anyway, the result of the check is to pass some defines to their build. I ended up just short-cutting the check and avoid unnecessary dependency on virtual/kernel: EXTRA_OEMAKE = "CROSS_COMPILE=${TARGET_PREFIX} ARCH=${TARGET_ARCH} \ EXTRA_CFLAGS='-D_GNU_SOURCE -DHAVE_CLOCK_ADJTIME \ -DHAVE_ONESTEP_SYNC'" Should I submit a patch to fix the above issues? -- Denys