All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Ångström versions?
@ 2011-02-04 11:51 Steffen Sledz
  2011-02-09  7:52 ` Steffen Sledz
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Steffen Sledz @ 2011-02-04 11:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: openembedded-devel

I'm a bit confused about the Angstrom versions.

Setting in local.conf is

  DISTRO = "angstrom-2008.1"

but bitbake reports

  Build Configuration:
  BB_VERSION        = "1.10.2"
  METADATA_BRANCH   = "testing-next"
  METADATA_REVISION = "3a7b93a"
  TARGET_ARCH       = "arm"
  TARGET_OS         = "linux-gnueabi"
  MACHINE           = "hipox"
  DISTRO            = "angstrom"
  DISTRO_VERSION    = "2010.7-test-20110204"
  TARGET_FPU        = "soft"

Is this intented?

BTW: Which is the suggested/released Ångström version? http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/ seems to be not very helpful here. e.g. the FAQ link results in an PAGE NOT FOUND. :(

Steffen



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Ångström versions?
  2011-02-04 11:51 Ångström versions? Steffen Sledz
@ 2011-02-09  7:52 ` Steffen Sledz
  2011-02-09  9:06   ` Henning Heinold
  2011-02-09  9:10   ` Graeme Gregory
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Steffen Sledz @ 2011-02-09  7:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: openembedded-devel; +Cc: Koen Kooi

Am 04.02.2011 12:51, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
> I'm a bit confused about the Angstrom versions.
> 
> Setting in local.conf is
> 
>   DISTRO = "angstrom-2008.1"
> 
> but bitbake reports
> 
>   Build Configuration:
>   BB_VERSION        = "1.10.2"
>   METADATA_BRANCH   = "testing-next"
>   METADATA_REVISION = "3a7b93a"
>   TARGET_ARCH       = "arm"
>   TARGET_OS         = "linux-gnueabi"
>   MACHINE           = "hipox"
>   DISTRO            = "angstrom"
>   DISTRO_VERSION    = "2010.7-test-20110204"
>   TARGET_FPU        = "soft"
> 
> Is this intented?
> 
> BTW: Which is the suggested/released Ångström version? http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/ seems to be not very helpful here. e.g. the FAQ link results in an PAGE NOT FOUND. :(

Ping!




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Ångström versions?
  2011-02-09  7:52 ` Steffen Sledz
@ 2011-02-09  9:06   ` Henning Heinold
  2011-02-09  9:10   ` Graeme Gregory
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Henning Heinold @ 2011-02-09  9:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: openembedded-devel

On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 08:52:45AM +0100, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> Am 04.02.2011 12:51, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
> > I'm a bit confused about the Angstrom versions.
> > 
> > Setting in local.conf is
> > 
> >   DISTRO = "angstrom-2008.1"
> > 
> > but bitbake reports
> > 
> >   Build Configuration:
> >   BB_VERSION        = "1.10.2"
> >   METADATA_BRANCH   = "testing-next"
> >   METADATA_REVISION = "3a7b93a"
> >   TARGET_ARCH       = "arm"
> >   TARGET_OS         = "linux-gnueabi"
> >   MACHINE           = "hipox"
> >   DISTRO            = "angstrom"
> >   DISTRO_VERSION    = "2010.7-test-20110204"
> >   TARGET_FPU        = "soft"
> > 
> > Is this intented?
> > 
> > BTW: Which is the suggested/released Ångström version? http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/ seems to be not very helpful here. e.g. the FAQ link results in an PAGE NOT FOUND. :(
> 
> Ping!

Hi,

I would do the following bitbake -e foo-target, gives me all variables. Than I would compare the PREFERRED_VERSION stuff
with the one from 2008.1 and 2010.x to see what was choosen. But I am sure it's 2008.1 and only the version
is somehow wrong.

Bye Henning



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Ångström versions?
  2011-02-09  7:52 ` Steffen Sledz
  2011-02-09  9:06   ` Henning Heinold
@ 2011-02-09  9:10   ` Graeme Gregory
  2011-02-09  9:23     ` Steffen Sledz
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Graeme Gregory @ 2011-02-09  9:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: openembedded-devel

On 09/02/2011 07:52, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> Am 04.02.2011 12:51, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
>> I'm a bit confused about the Angstrom versions.
>>
>> Setting in local.conf is
>>
>>   DISTRO = "angstrom-2008.1"
>>
>> but bitbake reports
>>
>>   Build Configuration:
>>   BB_VERSION        = "1.10.2"
>>   METADATA_BRANCH   = "testing-next"
>>   METADATA_REVISION = "3a7b93a"
>>   TARGET_ARCH       = "arm"
>>   TARGET_OS         = "linux-gnueabi"
>>   MACHINE           = "hipox"
>>   DISTRO            = "angstrom"
>>   DISTRO_VERSION    = "2010.7-test-20110204"
>>   TARGET_FPU        = "soft"
>>
>> Is this intented?
>>
>> BTW: Which is the suggested/released Ångström version? http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/ seems to be not very helpful here. e.g. the FAQ link results in an PAGE NOT FOUND. :(
2008.1 is the "stable" version of Angstrom which has all the benefit of
our extensive toolchain testing.

2010.x is angstrom-next and is the in progress version moving to gcc 4.5
blah blah blah.

Graeme




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Ångström versions?
  2011-02-09  9:10   ` Graeme Gregory
@ 2011-02-09  9:23     ` Steffen Sledz
  2011-02-09  9:30       ` Graeme Gregory
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Steffen Sledz @ 2011-02-09  9:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: openembedded-devel

Am 09.02.2011 10:10, schrieb Graeme Gregory:
> On 09/02/2011 07:52, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>> Am 04.02.2011 12:51, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
>>> I'm a bit confused about the Angstrom versions.
>>>
>>> Setting in local.conf is
>>>
>>>   DISTRO = "angstrom-2008.1"
>>>
>>> but bitbake reports
>>>
>>>   Build Configuration:
>>>   BB_VERSION        = "1.10.2"
>>>   METADATA_BRANCH   = "testing-next"
>>>   METADATA_REVISION = "3a7b93a"
>>>   TARGET_ARCH       = "arm"
>>>   TARGET_OS         = "linux-gnueabi"
>>>   MACHINE           = "hipox"
>>>   DISTRO            = "angstrom"
>>>   DISTRO_VERSION    = "2010.7-test-20110204"
>>>   TARGET_FPU        = "soft"
>>>
>>> Is this intented?
>>>
>>> BTW: Which is the suggested/released Ångström version? http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/ seems to be not very helpful here. e.g. the FAQ link results in an PAGE NOT FOUND. :(
> 2008.1 is the "stable" version of Angstrom which has all the benefit of
> our extensive toolchain testing.
> 
> 2010.x is angstrom-next and is the in progress version moving to gcc 4.5
> blah blah blah.

OK, but why bitbake reports DISTRO_VERSION = "2010.7-test-20110204" if it is set to DISTRO = "angstrom-2008.1" ???

Steffen

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@DResearch.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Ångström versions?
  2011-02-09  9:23     ` Steffen Sledz
@ 2011-02-09  9:30       ` Graeme Gregory
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Graeme Gregory @ 2011-02-09  9:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steffen Sledz; +Cc: openembedded-devel

On 09/02/2011 09:23, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> Am 09.02.2011 10:10, schrieb Graeme Gregory:
>> On 09/02/2011 07:52, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>> Am 04.02.2011 12:51, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
>>>> I'm a bit confused about the Angstrom versions.
>>>>
>>>> Setting in local.conf is
>>>>
>>>>   DISTRO = "angstrom-2008.1"
>>>>
>>>> but bitbake reports
>>>>
>>>>   Build Configuration:
>>>>   BB_VERSION        = "1.10.2"
>>>>   METADATA_BRANCH   = "testing-next"
>>>>   METADATA_REVISION = "3a7b93a"
>>>>   TARGET_ARCH       = "arm"
>>>>   TARGET_OS         = "linux-gnueabi"
>>>>   MACHINE           = "hipox"
>>>>   DISTRO            = "angstrom"
>>>>   DISTRO_VERSION    = "2010.7-test-20110204"
>>>>   TARGET_FPU        = "soft"
>>>>
>>>> Is this intented?
>>>>
>>>> BTW: Which is the suggested/released Ångström version? http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/ seems to be not very helpful here. e.g. the FAQ link results in an PAGE NOT FOUND. :(
>> 2008.1 is the "stable" version of Angstrom which has all the benefit of
>> our extensive toolchain testing.
>>
>> 2010.x is angstrom-next and is the in progress version moving to gcc 4.5
>> blah blah blah.
> OK, but why bitbake reports DISTRO_VERSION = "2010.7-test-20110204" if it is set to DISTRO = "angstrom-2008.1" ???
>
Because thats the actual version of the DISTRO produced.

We discovered if we rename the file people dont read emails or error
messages and waste a week debugging non issues so we stopped renaming
the file.

Graeme




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2011-02-09  9:31 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-02-04 11:51 Ångström versions? Steffen Sledz
2011-02-09  7:52 ` Steffen Sledz
2011-02-09  9:06   ` Henning Heinold
2011-02-09  9:10   ` Graeme Gregory
2011-02-09  9:23     ` Steffen Sledz
2011-02-09  9:30       ` Graeme Gregory

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.