From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [81.228.11.98] (helo=pne-smtpout1-sn1.fre.skanova.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MbcPR-0001wj-6G for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:40:10 +0200 Received: from [10.175.196.247] (213.66.88.44) by pne-smtpout1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (7.3.140.3) (authenticated as u82406562) id 4A683C78001C4EFF for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:23:36 +0200 Message-ID: <4A842FF6.70906@atmel.com> Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:23:34 +0200 From: Ulf Samuelsson Organization: Atmel Nordic AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <4A83BD15.7070006@atmel.com> <4A83E5FC.2020002@atmel.com> <4A8402B0.1000308@atmel.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Ideas for scripts, to save work, when building several boards X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 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: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:40:15 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Koen Kooi skrev: > On 13-08-09 14:10, Ulf Samuelsson wrote: >> Koen Kooi skrev: >>> On 13-08-09 12:07, Ulf Samuelsson wrote: >>>> Koen Kooi skrev: >>>>> On 13-08-09 09:13, Ulf Samuelsson wrote: >>>>>> Since I will need to test multiple boards, >>>>>> I decided to write some scripts which I will >>>>>> check in later today in origin/ulf/linux-2.6.30.2 >>>>>> >>>>>> I generated a "MAKEALL" script which will >>>>>> source a file "board_list.sh" with board build commands >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> build_board sam9263dfc x11-gpe-image >>>>>> build_board sam9g45ek opie-image >>>>>> build_board sam9g10df x11-gpe-image >>>>>> build_board sam9g20dfc console-image >>>>>> build_board sam9260dfc console-image >>>>>> build_board sam9261df x11-image >>>>>> build_board sam9xedfc console-image >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You do know that you can do that with MACHINE=foo bitbake bar, right? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Didn't try that. >>>> I assume this means that the cross compiler is not rebuilt, >>> >>> Unless you poked at the gcc recipes, no, it won't get rebuilt. >>> >>>> Is the root fs assembled from ipks then? >>> >>> if you use rootfs_ipk.bbclass, yes. >>> >>> Note that the official angstrom buildguide has mentioned that for years: >>> http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/building-angstrom >>> >> >> Thanks for helping out, but it does not work as expected. >> >> I first create a local.conf for the at91sam9261df >> and bitbake x11-image. >> Then I do "MACHINE=at91sam9g20dfc bitbake console-image". >> A console-image is built,but for the at91sam9261df, >> which is stored in "tmp/deploy/glibc/images/at91sam9261df" >> >> The bitbake does not generate u-boot/kernel or at91bootstrap >> for the at91sam9260dfc > > Then either our uboot/kernel/bootstrap recipes are wrong, or your > machine configs lack proper IMAGE_DEPENDS, either way that isn't the > fault of doing MACHINE=foo I guess something is wrong... Since I have created my own recipes for u-boot/bootstrap and kernel I have a primary object for the blame ;-) if that is the case. At least one more has reported u-boot, not beeing installed and they are not using my recipes. The machine description contains: EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS += "u-boot" EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS += "at91bootstrap" This seems to be the way u-boot is used in other boards, correct? It certainly makes the packages run until do_compile, but not any further. What do I need to specify to make a package go through to the do_deploy phase? at91bootstrap installs its files as part of do_compile which might be the wrong thing to do. - It installs though and U-boot doesn't until you bitbake u-boot. I might make a workaround to install u-boot in do_compile as well. Part of my u-boot patches contains an new "make DESTDIR=... install but if there is a preferred way of doing this, I would be keen to know. U-boot and bootstrap are a bit special, in that they are not part of the image, you just want to build them and install them anyway. =============================================== I noted that some boards + 2 packages sets EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS. conf/bitbake.conf:EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS = "" recipes/kexecboot/initramfs-kexecboot-image.bb:EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS = "" They are not using EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS += "..." I assume the first is an initialization, but the second? Not digged down deep enough to understand if this recipe is used, but if it is: Doesn't that mean that any previous declarations/dependencies are gone? =============================================== I maintain that if I do "MACHINE=at91sam9260dfc bitbake at91bootstrap" from the build directory, it is ignored and the MACHINE definition (MACHINE=at91sam9261df) in local.conf is used. Result: NOTE: Tasks Summary: Attempted 448 tasks of which 448 didn't need to be rerun and 0 failed. If I stay in the same directory and change local.conf to have MACHINE="at91sam9260dfc" and then do "bitbake at91bootstrap" then bootstrap builds for the new machine. I am running OpenSuSE-x64 and this has done things differently than Ubuntu multiple times... If you say it should work, and I can't get it to work, then I will just have to change the local.conf file (by symlinking) every time I want to build for a new board =============================================== > >> I believe that most at91 chips can use the same file system, >> so it makes sense to do it this way anyway. > > The images are built for the machine you specified with MACHINE, I > suspect you are getting confused somewhere. > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel -- Best Regards Ulf Samuelsson