Re: When building OpenBMC . . . ?

["Bills, Jason M" <jason.m.bills@linux.intel.com>]

On 9/2/2020 12:50 PM, Patrick Voelker wrote:
>   
>> On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 06:50:01PM +0000, Patrick Voelker wrote:
>>> I'm giving the first option below a try.  I've defined an alternative variant
>> and have included the meta-facebook/meta-tiogapass layer in my build.
>>>
>>> One problem I'm running into is that meta-tiogapass includes a
>> rsyslog*.bbappend and one of the other layers I'm using also has a similar
>> rsyslog*.bbappend.
>>>
>>> Each do an append to do_install() and each one tries to remove
>> ${D}${sysconfdir}/rsyslog.d/imjournal.conf.  Of course that file can only be
>> removed once so the build fails.
>>>
>>> My question now, is what's the best way to work around this?  I don't need
>> rsyslog from meta-tiogapass, just the machine specifics.
>>
>> If this is a common pattern, we should try to contribute it upstream to Yocto
>> as a PACKAGECONFIG option.  Then we can add to the PACKAGECONFIG in
>> the bbappend (you can do that as many times as you want).
>>
>> If we don't think Yocto would accept it, or they reject it, but it is still
>> something we're seeing often in our systems we can similarly add it as a
>> common bbappend in meta-phosphor (ideally triggered by a
>> PACKAGECONFIG).
> 
> Thanks for the response but I'm having a hard time connecting the dots.
> 
> My understanding of PACKAGECONFIG is that it's a way to provide build options for individual packages.  In this case, what PACKAGECONFIG option would we be contributing?
> 
> Is there a way now for me to force bitbake to ignore (or not use) rsyslog*.bbappend in meta-tiogapass from another layer?
> 
> The two appends that are conflicting are:
> meta-facebook/meta-tiogapass/recipes-extended/rsyslog/rsyslog_%.bbappend
> meta-intel/meta-common/recipes-extended/rsyslog/rsyslog_%.bbappend
I hit a similar issue when moving this recipe out of my downstream 
build.  I was able to resolve it by putting this change in my downstream 
version:
diff --git a/meta-common/recipes-extended/rsyslog/rsyslog_%.bbappend 
b/meta-common/recipes-extended/rsyslog/rsyslog_%.bbappend
index 7e282804..ef670451 100644
--- a/meta-common/recipes-extended/rsyslog/rsyslog_%.bbappend
+++ b/meta-common/recipes-extended/rsyslog/rsyslog_%.bbappend
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ do_install_append() {
          install -d ${D}${systemd_system_unitdir}/rsyslog.service.d
          install -m 0644 ${WORKDIR}/rsyslog-override.conf \
 
${D}${systemd_system_unitdir}/rsyslog.service.d/rsyslog-override.conf
-        rm ${D}${sysconfdir}/rsyslog.d/imjournal.conf
+        rm -f ${D}${sysconfdir}/rsyslog.d/imjournal.conf
  }

  SYSTEMD_SERVICE_${PN} += " rotate-event-logs.service 
rotate-event-logs.timer"

We can apply a similar change to one or both of these upstream recipes. 
Or, is this a candidate for meta-phosphor?

> 
> Can I choose one over the other instead of having them build upon eachother?
>