From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.multimedia-labs.de ([82.149.226.172]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PsFYa-0004kD-Vf for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 15:19:08 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.multimedia-labs.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB6D314DFE6 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 15:17:51 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.multimedia-labs.de Received: from mail.multimedia-labs.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.multimedia-labs.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 8behMnfGzEgy for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 15:17:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from [172.22.22.61] (ip-94-79-168-47.unitymediagroup.de [94.79.168.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.multimedia-labs.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE0E6314DFC5 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 15:17:45 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4D651709.3070909@opendreambox.org> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 15:17:45 +0100 From: Andreas Oberritter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110208 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <4D63F7F9.7000804@eukrea.com> <4D63FF5C.30400@opendreambox.org> <20110222201107.GB3970@localhost.jama.net> In-Reply-To: <20110222201107.GB3970@localhost.jama.net> Subject: Re: Weird behaviour with PPP 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: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 14:19:09 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Martin, On 02/22/2011 09:11 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 07:24:28PM +0100, Andreas Oberritter wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 02/22/2011 06:52 PM, Eric Benard wrote: >>> On 22/02/2011 18:22, Mickael Chazaux wrote: >>>> I have a hard time figuring out why bitbake seems to mix versions of >>>> ppp... Any ideas? >>>> >>> strange, which distro, git tag, bitbake version are you using ? >>> >>> Both bitbake ppp-2.4.5 & bitbake -b >>> openembedded/recipes/ppp/ppp_2.4.5.bb work fine here (angstrom 2008.1, >>> armv5 target, bitbake 1.12.0). >> >> I don't think this has anything to do with ppp. I faced the same issue >> with a local recipe, of which an older version had been built before. >> When packaging, the old version was used. A new workdir was created for >> the old version during this step and the resulting packages were empty. >> No recipe existed for this old version at that time, i.e. PR had already >> been increased to 1.0, but 0.0 was used by bitbake. >> >> In the end, I deleted bitbake's cache and all files matching the >> package's name to get rid of the annoying problem. I think there were >> pstage packages of the old version lying around. > > This wrong behavior is quite common ie after changing PACKAGE_ARCH, see: > http://www.mail-archive.com/openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org/msg04280.html In that thread, if I understood correctly, Richard suggested that packaged staging could solve the problem. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Do you know why? Regards, Andreas