From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [89.96.204.112] (helo=www-zirak-new.zirak.it) by linuxtogo.org with smtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IfH3n-0004Xa-B9 for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:31:51 +0200 Received: (qmail 25272 invoked by uid 64017); 9 Oct 2007 15:20:52 -0000 Received: from 62.123.41.74 (filippo@zirak.it@62.123.41.74) by www-zirak-new (envelope-from , uid 64011) with qmail-scanner-2.01 (uvscan: v5.1.00/v5052. bogofilter: 0.92.0. spamassassin: 3.0.4. Clear:RC:1(62.123.41.74):. Processed in 0.789407 secs); 09 Oct 2007 15:20:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.200?) (filippo@zirak.it@62.123.41.74) by www-zirak-new.zirak.it with SMTP; 9 Oct 2007 15:20:50 -0000 Message-ID: <470B9D9D.5080501@linux.it> Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:26:21 +0200 From: Filippo Basso User-Agent: IceDove 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070730) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: different hosts, different OE images X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 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: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:31:51 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, here is another developer jumped into the world of OE... Wow! really amazing tool...! Anyway, today I got into a strange behaviours that depends on the machine on which I'm bitbakin' (a debian testing/lenny and a debian stable/etch on vmware). I understood that the results should be highly independent from host system, so I begun debugging a bit. So, I luckily (!) got also into a difference that lead me to a compile/non-compile, much easier to debug. On a angstrom-2007.1 and i586 architecture, I added "minimo" web-browser and I got that with the same identical OE installation it compiles on my machine and fails compiling in my vmware. 2 new points are now in my debug log: 1st point - (one of these "I want to understand why...") in general, quite all the files "run.do_configure.xxx" or similar are not sorted in the same way; definitions of environment variables are in different order, depending on the system... is it normal? 2nd point - (one that let me thing "is this a bug...?") in mozilla minimo webbrowser (minimo-1_0.02+cvs20070626-r0) the log.do_compile is strange: ***debian etch*** .... ccache gcc -o host_xpidl -isystem/home/nbt/OSSTBOX/trunk/oe/build-nbt-crownbeach/tmp/staging/i586-angstrom-linux/include -fexpensive-optimizations -fomit-frame-pointer -frename-registers -Os -DXP_UNIX -O3 -I/home/nbt/OSSTBOX/trunk/oe/build-nbt-crownbeach/tmp/staging/i586-angstrom-linux/include/libIDL-2.0 -I/home/nbt/OSSTBOX/trunk/oe/build-nbt-crownbeach/tmp/staging/i586-angstrom-linux/include/glib-2.0 -I/home/nbt/OSSTBOX/trunk/oe/build-nbt-crownbeach/tmp/staging/i586-angstrom-linux/lib/glib-2.0/include -DMDCPUCFG=\"md/_linux.cfg\" host_xpidl.o host_xpidl_idl.o host_xpidl_util.o host_xpidl_header.o host_xpidl_typelib.o host_xpidl_doc.o host_xpidl_java.o ../../../dist/host/lib/libhostxpt.a -L/home/nbt/OSSTBOX/trunk/oe/build-nbt-crownbeach/tmp/staging/i586-angstrom-linux/lib -lIDL-2 -lglib-2.0 /home/nbt/OSSTBOX/trunk/oe/build-nbt-crownbeach/tmp/staging/i586-angstrom-linux/lib/libc.so.6: undefined reference to `_dl_tls_get_addr_soft@GLIBC_PRIVATE' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[7]: *** [host_xpidl] Error 1 ... FATAL: oe_runmake failed ***debian lenny*** the above "ccache gcc -o host_xpidl..." works well, even if there are some warnings in compiling "ccache gcc -o host_xpidl_java.o ..." that are not present in etch. is this a bug? shouldn't the recipe invoke "ccache i586-angstrom-linux-gcc" instead of "ccache gcc" (as is doing in other parts of the recipe)??? Am I right saying that there it's using my gcc and not the cross-gcc? is there an elegant way to check which other packages are using somewhere my gcc and not the right one? (there was also another difference in behaviours, before minimo, between the 2 images created) thank you for all, hope to contribute more actively soon, now just need some newbie confirmations! phy