From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from hermes.mlbassoc.com ([64.234.241.98] helo=mail.chez-thomas.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OkqXx-0000dj-9B for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 16 Aug 2010 05:39:39 +0200 Received: by mail.chez-thomas.org (Postfix, from userid 999) id 19ADF16607CC; Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:39:06 -0600 (MDT) Received: from hermes.chez-thomas.org (hermes_local [192.168.1.101]) by mail.chez-thomas.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A0FA16607C0; Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:38:45 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <4C68B2C5.5030908@mlbassoc.com> Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:38:45 -0600 From: Gary Thomas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100430 Fedora/3.0.4-2.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: In-Reply-To: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 64.234.241.98 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gary@mlbassoc.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Cc: "General mailing list for gumstix users." Subject: Re: What to do about the poor bitbake Quality Control? 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: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 03:39:39 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 08/14/2010 01:01 PM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > 2010/8/14 AJ ONeal: >> This is about the 4th time that I've `rm -rf`-d everything and started from >> scratch and never yet got a working `bitbake omap3-console-image` >> >> Every time I `git pull` it's a different set of problems. It's never the >> same package twice, but they never all compile for the basic console image >> anywhere from 4 to 20 hours in. >> >> Fortunately, I do have a machine that did build omap3-console-image a few >> weeks ago at work. But I've never been able to get it on my machine at home >> (same os) to start playing around with. >> >> What needs to happen in order for things to git checked that they work with >> at least a few common meta-tasks before being pushed out? >> And is there anything I can do to help? (Donate some machine time to run >> tests, for example) >> >> >> Obviously, we all have our day jobs and whatnot, but this is becoming really >> frustrating for me and I'd like to see things improve. >> > > If you are using dev head, you're living on the edge. If you can't > stand that better use the stable branch. The biggest problem (as discussed at great length already) is that the distance from 'dev' to 'stable' can be measured in years :-( 'stable' just isn't useful at all for "current" work... > As far as there are issues: > Either report them, or better fix them. > (or as a workaround you could find the commit wthat broke it and > report that and perhaps temporariy locally revert that commit if you > cannot fix it). > > Having said that: > I don't really see many issues. Maybe I'm building a different set of > packages or for a different set of hw or for a different distro. Turning a blind eye, I would say. I (and others) have nearly 0% success building any Angstrom image on an x86_64 based host. I've tried the latest Ubuntu and Fedora - neither works, both yield different failures. At least I have i686 build hosts to fall back on, but there are issues there as well. -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates | Embedded world ------------------------------------------------------------