Mistakenly pushed changes without review, specially 6633c4c95a

Mistakenly pushed changes without review, specially 6633c4c95a

[Otavio Salvador]

Hello,

I did a push by mistake while preparing to send the request for review
to the mailing list.

I'm sorry by this :(

I'm specially interested to know about 6633c4c95a. If people objects
on it I can revert it but I think it is not necessary to revert it if
people agrees with it.

So could people ack on it or nack? In case of nacks, I revert it later today.

Sorry again,

-- 
Otavio Salvador                  O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854         http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: Mistakenly pushed changes without review, specially 6633c4c95a

[Michael Smith]

Hi Otavio,

Otavio Salvador wrote:
> I'm specially interested to know about 6633c4c95a. If people objects
> on it I can revert it but I think it is not necessary to revert it if
> people agrees with it.

It looked good to me, but bitbake bails with:

RuntimeError: dictionary changed size during iteration

(reverting 6633c4c9 fixes it for me)

Also -- I've seen some references to MACHINE_CLASS. I'm wondering if it 
was intended to solve a similar problem.

Here's the traceback for the bailout.

Traceback (most recent call last):
   File "/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/bin/bitbake", line 143, in ?
     main()
   File "/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/bin/bitbake", line 123, in main
     cooker.parseConfiguration()
   File "/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/lib/bb/cooker.py", line 68, in 
parseConfiguration
     self.parseConfigurationFile( os.path.join( "conf", "bitbake.conf" ) )
   File "/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/lib/bb/cooker.py", line 390, in 
parseConfigurationFile
     self.configuration.data = bb.parse.handle( afile, 
self.configuration.data )
   File "/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/lib/bb/parse/__init__.py", line 
75, in handle
     return h['handle'](fn, data, include)
   File 
"/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/lib/bb/parse/parse_py/ConfHandler.py", 
line 167, in handle
     feeder(lineno, s, fn, data)
   File 
"/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/lib/bb/parse/parse_py/ConfHandler.py", 
line 221, in feeder
     include(fn, s, data, "include required")
   File 
"/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/lib/bb/parse/parse_py/ConfHandler.py", 
line 114, in include
     ret = handle(fn, data, True)
   File "/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/lib/bb/parse/__init__.py", line 
75, in handle
     return h['handle'](fn, data, include)
   File 
"/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/lib/bb/parse/parse_py/ConfHandler.py", 
line 167, in handle
     feeder(lineno, s, fn, data)
   File 
"/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/lib/bb/parse/parse_py/ConfHandler.py", 
line 192, in feeder
     bb.data.update_data(e)
   File "/home/michael/startitup/bitbake/lib/bb/data.py", line 509, in 
update_data
     for var in vars:
RuntimeError: dictionary changed size during iteration

Re: Mistakenly pushed changes without review, specially 6633c4c95a

[Otavio Salvador]

Hello Michael,

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Michael Smith<msmith@cbnco.com> wrote:
> It looked good to me, but bitbake bails with:

Yes, you weren't the only one and it has already been reverted in dev.
I'd like to fix it now to get it properly pushed.

[...]
> Also -- I've seen some references to MACHINE_CLASS. I'm wondering if it was
> intended to solve a similar problem.

Similar, yes.

MACHINE_CLASS is different since it is not supported by all distros
and it has been being used for reuse a class of settings not whole
configuration like kernel defconfig, etc...

Besides that the MACHINE_FALLBACK is going to be used as MACHINE in
case MACHINE is not found. That makes quite easy to reuse kernel and
other settings. For example if you have a machine that uses geodelx
processor you might reuse the defconfig for it (quite useful specially
at began of a new board development).

> Here's the traceback for the bailout.

Please tell me more about your environment:

 - distro
 - machine

TIA,

-- 
Otavio Salvador                  O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854         http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: Mistakenly pushed changes without review, specially 6633c4c95a

[Michael Smith]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009, Otavio Salvador wrote:

> I'd like to fix it now to get it properly pushed.

Hi Otavio,

In bitbake.conf you moved the "Config file processing" section below 
"Include the rest of the config files." If I move it back up, it works.

Some of the included files (i.e. glibc.inc) append a colon and some values 
to OVERRIDES, and I think the parser might have been choking on the empty 
override (':' at the beginning).

You also changed OVERRIDES to use weak assignment (?=). I tested it both 
ways and it doesn't make any difference for me, but should this be weak?

I'm building in an overlay and my distro's config file appends a value to 
OVERRIDES, which may be why I saw it.

Mike