From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from starfish.geekisp.com ([216.168.135.166]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PKEJd-0005kS-6S for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 19:07:06 +0100 Received: (qmail 27392 invoked by uid 1003); 21 Nov 2010 18:05:46 -0000 Received: from adsl-75-37-22-143.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net (HELO ?192.168.1.148?) (philip@opensdr.com@75.37.22.143) by mail.geekisp.com with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 21 Nov 2010 18:05:46 -0000 Message-ID: <4CE95F77.9000804@balister.org> Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 10:05:43 -0800 From: Philip Balister User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Fedora/3.1.6-1.fc13 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <4CE6FA0C.2090801@balister.org> <4CE9332C.7020701@opendreambox.org> <4CE95578.8000604@opendreambox.org> In-Reply-To: <4CE95578.8000604@opendreambox.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 216.168.135.166 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: philip@balister.org 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) Subject: Re: Revert commit c2c8fe4c5629add94bd0b922f5b3446624a9f4d8 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: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:07:06 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/21/2010 09:23 AM, Andreas Oberritter wrote: > On 11/21/2010 05:17 PM, Khem Raj wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Andreas Oberritter >> wrote: >>> On 11/19/2010 11:28 PM, Philip Balister wrote: >>>> I'd like to revert commit c2c8fe4c5629add94bd0b922f5b3446624a9f4d8. With >>>> this commit my build that includes angstrom-task-gnome.bb fails in a >>>> peculiar way. Basically, my process table is filled with a task. Looks >>>> like it is trying to run a pkg-config gtk+ operation. This is with >>>> angstrom-2010.x and a custom machine very similar to an overo. >>>> >>>> I realize this is a vague description, but I do not have time to isolate >>>> better at this time. >>>> >>>> Can we go ahead and revert this for now? >>> >>> No, please don't. >>> >>> I'm 100% sure that this patch is the only sane way of handling >>> pkg-config files. I hope you agree that it wasn't possible for me to >>> test every single package before this got merged. >>> >> >> agreed. but we are soon going to make a release. So it compiled (in >> whatever way) >> and now it doesnt (looking from 36000 ft above). >> So either we fix the known regressions caused or backout because we >> can not make release in this state for sure. > > Soon means in 10 days AFAIK, and you can still revert the patch in the > release branch if needed. No need to revert it in master just to hide > already existing bugs. If we can fix this before the release, I am happy. It looks like several people are working on this. I'll be traveling most of the next week, but I will try to keep testing .dev to make sure this is OK for the release. Thanks for working on this issue! Philip > >>> Still, the solution for problems popping up now is simple: Make sure >>> that required libraries install their pkg-config files themselves. >>> Usually, they would already do it, but their install rules are >>> overridden by custom do_install or do_stage rules in their bitbake recipe. >>> >>> As you already mentioned, the package causing the problem is gtk+ >>> (gtk+-1.2_1.2.10.bb). >>> >>> The solution in this case is very likely to >>> - remove do_stage >>> - add ${bindir}/gtk-config to FILES_${PN}-dev >>> - bump PR >>> >> >> super can you cook up a patch. > > Sure, but only after I either received positive feedback or the build on > my newly set up host finished. That's why I wrote: > >>> I'd have already submitted a patch, but testing takes a lot of time, >>> especially when a recipe takes down the build machine. > > Regards, > Andreas > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel >