Revert Request for linux -> linux-gnu changes

Revert Request for linux -> linux-gnu changes

[Graeme Gregory]

Hi, I cannot actually carry out this request as I will be without net
access for the eV meeting.

But it is becoming clear that the linux -> linux-gnu change is throwing
up many issues for arches != linux-gnueabi. Partial fixes have been
implemented but for every fix another issue seems to pop up.

I suggest these changes should be reverted, placed in a branch and
properly merged at a later date after proper review.

Graeme (XorA)

Re: Revert Request for linux -> linux-gnu changes

[Holger Hans Peter Freyther]

On Thursday 08 October 2009 14:53:02 Graeme Gregory wrote:
> Hi, I cannot actually carry out this request as I will be without net
> access for the eV meeting.
> 
> But it is becoming clear that the linux -> linux-gnu change is throwing
> up many issues for arches != linux-gnueabi. Partial fixes have been
> implemented but for every fix another issue seems to pop up.
> 
> I suggest these changes should be reverted, placed in a branch and
> properly merged at a later date after proper review.

As hard as it is. I agree that it should be backed out and put in a branch and 
tested on non EABI systems. We find new regressions every day.

The current list of today are:
          - insane.bbclass needs 'linux' and 'linux-gnu'. Linux for native 
            packages and the other for our one

          - bitbake meta-toolchain does not work due task-sdk-base, I think
            it is due the change but I don't know.

regards
	holger

PS: I'm willing to help by compile testing non ARM builds

Re: Revert Request for linux -> linux-gnu changes

[Steffen Sledz]

Graeme Gregory wrote:
> But it is becoming clear that the linux -> linux-gnu change is throwing
> up many issues for arches != linux-gnueabi. Partial fixes have been
> implemented but for every fix another issue seems to pop up.
> 
> I suggest these changes should be reverted, placed in a branch and
> properly merged at a later date after proper review.

+1

Re: Revert Request for linux -> linux-gnu changes

[Marcin Juszkiewicz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 674 bytes --]

Dnia czwartek, 8 października 2009 o 14:53:02 Graeme Gregory napisał(a):
> Hi, I cannot actually carry out this request as I will be without net
> access for the eV meeting.
> 
> But it is becoming clear that the linux -> linux-gnu change is throwing
> up many issues for arches != linux-gnueabi. Partial fixes have been
> implemented but for every fix another issue seems to pop up.
> 
> I suggest these changes should be reverted, placed in a branch and
> properly merged at a later date after proper review.

+1

Regards, 
-- 
JID:      hrw@jabber.org
Website:  http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: Revert Request for linux -> linux-gnu changes

[Phil Blundell]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 15:23 +0200, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote:
> As hard as it is. I agree that it should be backed out and put in a branch and 
> tested on non EABI systems. We find new regressions every day.

Yes, I agree.  It isn't even completely obvious to me that this change
has a great deal of merit.  As I wrote in:

http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2009-September/013577.html

it doesn't seem as if switching TARGET_OS from "linux" to "linux-gnu"
brings any benefits other than trivial cosmetic ones, and it is a shame
to break everybody's builds just for that.

So, personally, I would be tempted to just revert it and leave it
reverted rather than burning a lot of manpower on trying to make
"linux-gnu" work for everybody at once.  If individual DISTROs want to
switch to linux-gnu then they are obviously welcome to do so and pick up
the pieces for themselves.

p.

Re: Revert Request for linux -> linux-gnu changes

[Khem Raj]

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Phil Blundell <philb@gnu.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 15:23 +0200, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote:
>> As hard as it is. I agree that it should be backed out and put in a branch and
>> tested on non EABI systems. We find new regressions every day.
>
> Yes, I agree.  It isn't even completely obvious to me that this change
> has a great deal of merit.  As I wrote in:
>
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2009-September/013577.html
>
> it doesn't seem as if switching TARGET_OS from "linux" to "linux-gnu"
> brings any benefits other than trivial cosmetic ones, and it is a shame
> to break everybody's builds just for that.
>
> So, personally, I would be tempted to just revert it and leave it
> reverted rather than burning a lot of manpower on trying to make
> "linux-gnu" work for everybody at once.  If individual DISTROs want to
> switch to linux-gnu then they are obviously welcome to do so and pick up
> the pieces for themselves.

It seems to be more entwined that it initially appeared to me. This
changes obviously
needs time to settle in as it gets tested in different ways. I thought
we would fix the fallouts as we find them
but I am fine to revert it as it seems to what other devs are leaning towards.
I will revert the cosmetic parts.

>
> p.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>