From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [213.4.149.66] (helo=ctsmtpout2.frontal.correo) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1GST7i-0002K2-So for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 27 Sep 2006 08:42:27 +0200 Received: from [194.179.62.31] (217.126.70.245) by ctsmtpout2.frontal.correo (7.2.056.6) (authenticated as joaquinduran$adtelecom.es) id 451970460000D78E for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 27 Sep 2006 08:37:30 +0200 Message-ID: <451A29EA.1080309@adtelecom.es> Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 08:36:10 +0100 From: Joaquim Duran User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060926) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Linux Distributions References: <45190D58.2020807@adtelecom.es> <1865823264.20060926150138@gmail.com> <451948D7.6000904@adtelecom.es> In-Reply-To: <451948D7.6000904@adtelecom.es> Subject: Re: List of dependent packages X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.8 Precedence: list Reply-To: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Linux Distributions List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Linux Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 06:42:27 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, As I've the impression that Bitbake is very related to OE. I post the bug here. I execute: bitbake -g boostrap-image. Output: NOTE: Parsing finished. 3962 cached, 0 parsed, 139 skipped, 27 masked. Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/qduran/oe/bitbake/bin/bitbake", line 1161, in ? main() File "/home/qduran/oe/bitbake/bin/bitbake", line 1156, in main cooker.cook( BBConfiguration( options ), args[1:] ) File "/home/qduran/oe/bitbake/bin/bitbake", line 962, in cook self.generateDotGraph( pkgs_to_build, self.configuration.ignored_dot_deps ) File "/home/qduran/oe/bitbake/bin/bitbake", line 544, in generateDotGraph add_depends( pkgs_to_build ) File "/home/qduran/oe/bitbake/bin/bitbake", line 467, in add_depends fn = myFilterProvider(providers, package)[0] File "/home/qduran/oe/bitbake/bin/bitbake", line 413, in myFilterProvider preferred_versions[pn] = bb.providers.findBestProvider(pn, pkg_pn)[2:4] TypeError: findBestProvider() takes at least 3 arguments (2 given) Hope this helps. Thanks and Best Regards, Joaquim Duran En/na Joaquim Duran ha escrit: > Hello, > > Thanks for your answer. This is closer that I was looking for. > > I've tested both options (--dry-run) and (--graphviz). > > Using the first one with bootstrap image, the following output has been > shown (it shown that several packages should be used and I should choose > one): > > OE Build Configuration: > BB_VERSION = "1.6.1" > OE_REVISION = "57f56983ed32783fae7cfa0440e1f3a7cfc2280c" > TARGET_ARCH = "arm" > TARGET_OS = "linux" > MACHINE = "colibri" > DISTRO = "colibrioe" > DISTRO_VERSION = "1.0" > TARGET_FPU = "" > > NOTE: multiple providers are available (task-bootstrap-unionroot, > task-bootstrap); > NOTE: consider defining PREFERRED_PROVIDER_task-bootstrap > NOTE: package bootstrap-image-1.0: started > NOTE: package bootstrap-image-1.0: completed > NOTE: build 200609261620: completed > > > The simple question is: how can I define > PREFERRED_PROVIDER_task-bootstrap line the local.conf file? > > > The execution of the second option has finished with an error of > bitbake. I'll send the error to bitbake page. > > > Thanks and Best Regards, > Joaquim Duran > > > > En/na Paul Sokolovsky ha escrit: >> Hello Joaquim, >> >> Tuesday, September 26, 2006, 2:22:00 PM, you wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> Is there any way to know the set of packages to be included in an >>> image? Or more generally, how can I list the set of packages (with >>> recursion) that are needed for one specified package? >>> This should be done once processed the config file and updated the cache >>> and before the compilation of packages. >> bitbake --help would the first place to consult. --dry-run, >> --verbose, --graphviz swicthes would be of primary interest. And yes, >> bitbake still doesn't provide enough insight into its internal >> functioning. Patches to improve that (given they cover broad usecases) >> would be welcome by Bitbake maintainers, I guess. >> >>> Thanks and Best Regards, >>> Joaquim Duran >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel >