working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Robert P. J. Day]

  finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on
kernel labs described here:

https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel

since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course,
so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this
road.  start with lab 1.

  the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers
-- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for
the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will
happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing
dependencies on those two layers in a new layer?

  also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces:

ERROR: QA Issue:
/home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb:
Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this.

  is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the
lab as part of an exercise? just curious.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 13-04-08 11:41 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
>    finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on
> kernel labs described here:
>
> https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel
>
> since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course,
> so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this
> road.  start with lab 1.
>
>    the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers
> -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for
> the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will
> happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing
> dependencies on those two layers in a new layer?
>
>    also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces:
>
> ERROR: QA Issue:
> /home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb:
> Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this.
>
>    is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the
> lab as part of an exercise? just curious.

Probably not deliberate, the kernel labs aren't about packaging. Which 
branch
are you using for your tests ? Even if it's an old release branch, there
may have been some QA backports between the time the lab was done, and
the time you are running it.

Bruce

>
> rday
>

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Bruce Ashfield wrote:

> On 13-04-08 11:41 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> >    finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on
> > kernel labs described here:
> >
> > https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel
> >
> > since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course,
> > so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this
> > road.  start with lab 1.
> >
> >    the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers
> > -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for
> > the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will
> > happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing
> > dependencies on those two layers in a new layer?
> >
> >    also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces:
> >
> > ERROR: QA Issue:
> > /home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb:
> > Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this.
> >
> >    is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the
> > lab as part of an exercise? just curious.
>
> Probably not deliberate, the kernel labs aren't about packaging.
> Which branch are you using for your tests ? Even if it's an old
> release branch, there may have been some QA backports between the
> time the lab was done, and the time you are running it.

  i'm using HEAD for everything, even though the labs dictate
poky-danny-8.0.1; if anything breaks because of that, i'll make a note
of it.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 13-04-08 12:02 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>
>> On 13-04-08 11:41 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>>>
>>>     finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on
>>> kernel labs described here:
>>>
>>> https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel
>>>
>>> since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course,
>>> so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this
>>> road.  start with lab 1.
>>>
>>>     the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers
>>> -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for
>>> the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will
>>> happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing
>>> dependencies on those two layers in a new layer?
>>>
>>>     also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces:
>>>
>>> ERROR: QA Issue:
>>> /home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb:
>>> Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this.
>>>
>>>     is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the
>>> lab as part of an exercise? just curious.
>>
>> Probably not deliberate, the kernel labs aren't about packaging.
>> Which branch are you using for your tests ? Even if it's an old
>> release branch, there may have been some QA backports between the
>> time the lab was done, and the time you are running it.
>
>    i'm using HEAD for everything, even though the labs dictate
> poky-danny-8.0.1; if anything breaks because of that, i'll make a note
> of it.

That's what I wondered. These were all done against 1.3, so the QA
warning (and other issues you'll see) are very likely caused by this
skew. For the next round of conferences, there are plans to update
them to use 1.4 and get required cleanup.

Bruce

>
> rday
>

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Bruce Ashfield wrote:

> On 13-04-08 12:02 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> >
> > > On 13-04-08 11:41 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > > >
> > > >     finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on
> > > > kernel labs described here:
> > > >
> > > > https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel
> > > >
> > > > since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course,
> > > > so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this
> > > > road.  start with lab 1.
> > > >
> > > >     the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers
> > > > -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for
> > > > the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will
> > > > happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing
> > > > dependencies on those two layers in a new layer?
> > > >
> > > >     also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces:
> > > >
> > > > ERROR: QA Issue:
> > > > /home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb:
> > > > Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this.
> > > >
> > > >     is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the
> > > > lab as part of an exercise? just curious.
> > >
> > > Probably not deliberate, the kernel labs aren't about packaging.
> > > Which branch are you using for your tests ? Even if it's an old
> > > release branch, there may have been some QA backports between the
> > > time the lab was done, and the time you are running it.
> >
> >    i'm using HEAD for everything, even though the labs dictate
> > poky-danny-8.0.1; if anything breaks because of that, i'll make a note
> > of it.
>
> That's what I wondered. These were all done against 1.3, so the QA
> warning (and other issues you'll see) are very likely caused by this
> skew. For the next round of conferences, there are plans to update
> them to use 1.4 and get required cleanup.

  okey dokey.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Tom Zanussi]

On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 11:41 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on
> kernel labs described here:
> 
> https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel
> 
> since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course,
> so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this
> road.  start with lab 1.
> 
>   the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers
> -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for
> the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will
> happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing
> dependencies on those two layers in a new layer?
> 

The bblayers.conf for the labs is just the bblayers.conf that gets
generated the first time you source oe-init-build-env in poky, which is
what the lab is based on.  You shouldn't need those layers - the BSPs
should work fine outside of poky, but since this is a yocto lab and it
uses poky, there's no need to make a point of removing them - actually,
I haven't tried removing those layers - meta-yocto-bsp could certainly
be removed since it's all machine-specific to existing BSPs, but it's
easy enough to remove them and see...

>   also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces:
> 
> ERROR: QA Issue:
> /home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb:
> Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this.
> 
>   is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the
> lab as part of an exercise? just curious.
> 

The labs are and should be targeted to a specific release for exactly
the reason you just discovered - in this case, the main metadata
promoted various QA Issues into errors immediately following the
release.   In this case you were lucky and hit an example of something
obvious, most of the time it's not that obvious - basically if you do
anything outside of what's specified in the labs, especially working
from master, all bets are off...

Tom

> rday
> 

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Tom Zanussi wrote:

> On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 11:41 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on
> > kernel labs described here:
> >
> > https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel
> >
> > since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course,
> > so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this
> > road.  start with lab 1.
> >
> >   the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp
> > layers -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition
> > file for the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies.
> > what will happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on
> > explicitly listing dependencies on those two layers in a new
> > layer?
> >
>
> The bblayers.conf for the labs is just the bblayers.conf that gets
> generated the first time you source oe-init-build-env in poky, which
> is what the lab is based on.  You shouldn't need those layers - the
> BSPs should work fine outside of poky, but since this is a yocto lab
> and it uses poky, there's no need to make a point of removing them -
> actually, I haven't tried removing those layers - meta-yocto-bsp
> could certainly be removed since it's all machine-specific to
> existing BSPs, but it's easy enough to remove them and see...

  i took them out since i'm a minimalist -- i really like to strip out
anything that doesn't need to be there to avoid any unexpected side
effects.  so far, doesn't seem to have made a difference, and i didn't
expect it to.

  to lab 2.  and beyond!

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Trevor Woerner]

Hi Robert,

Since you're working your way through the labs, I was wondering if
you'd be interested in testing something out for me? When I went
through these labs I had set my PACKAGE_CLASSES to package_ipk instead
of the default package_rpm. While doing so I had discovered a bug
which I reported, but nobody else (to my knowledge) tried to reproduce
the issue. Would you mind working through the labs with package_ipk
and seeing if there are some things that don't work as advertised?

Best regards,
    Trevor

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Trevor Woerner wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> Since you're working your way through the labs, I was wondering if
> you'd be interested in testing something out for me? When I went
> through these labs I had set my PACKAGE_CLASSES to package_ipk instead
> of the default package_rpm. While doing so I had discovered a bug
> which I reported, but nobody else (to my knowledge) tried to reproduce
> the issue. Would you mind working through the labs with package_ipk
> and seeing if there are some things that don't work as advertised?

  does this mean PACKAGE_CLASSES should be *exclusively* ipk, or that
ipk simply be in there?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Trevor Woerner]

On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>   does this mean PACKAGE_CLASSES should be *exclusively* ipk, or that
> ipk simply be in there?

Yes, that's how I had been testing it (exclusively package_ipk).

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Trevor Woerner wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >   does this mean PACKAGE_CLASSES should be *exclusively* ipk, or that
> > ipk simply be in there?
>
> Yes, that's how I had been testing it (exclusively package_ipk).

  well, at the moment, that's what local.conf contains, so i'm just
using the default i got when i created a new project.  at least that
was the default for lab 1. should i expect that to change in a later
lab?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Trevor Woerner wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> Since you're working your way through the labs, I was wondering if
> you'd be interested in testing something out for me? When I went
> through these labs I had set my PACKAGE_CLASSES to package_ipk instead
> of the default package_rpm. While doing so I had discovered a bug
> which I reported, but nobody else (to my knowledge) tried to reproduce
> the issue. Would you mind working through the labs with package_ipk
> and seeing if there are some things that don't work as advertised?

  ok, so what am i looking for?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Trevor Woerner]

On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>   ok, so what am i looking for?

I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk
to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image,
but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I
tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever
it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a
danny-8.0.1 problem).

https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html

When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of
packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple
times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else
tried reproducing it.

This might be of interest to anyone still using danny.

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Tom Zanussi]

On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 18:06 -0400, Trevor Woerner wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >   ok, so what am i looking for?
> 
> I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk
> to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image,
> but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I
> tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever
> it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a
> danny-8.0.1 problem).
> 
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html
> 
> When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of
> packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple
> times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else
> tried reproducing it.

I believe I tried and couldn't reproduce it.  But if someone does
reproduce it, please file a bug detailing the *exact* steps needed to
reproduce.

Thanks,

Tom

> 
> This might be of interest to anyone still using danny.
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Tom Zanussi wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 18:06 -0400, Trevor Woerner wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > >   ok, so what am i looking for?
> >
> > I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk
> > to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image,
> > but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I
> > tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever
> > it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a
> > danny-8.0.1 problem).
> >
> > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html
> >
> > When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of
> > packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple
> > times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else
> > tried reproducing it.
>
> I believe I tried and couldn't reproduce it.  But if someone does
> reproduce it, please file a bug detailing the *exact* steps needed to
> reproduce.

  hmmmm ... for fun, i'm using HEAD for everything so i might avoid it
entirely.  if i have time, i'll give it a shot.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Trevor Woerner]

On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@intel.com> wrote:
> I believe I tried and couldn't reproduce it.  But if someone does
> reproduce it, please file a bug detailing the *exact* steps needed to
> reproduce.

Thanks for the update, I wasn't 100% sure if you had found the time to
give it a try or not.

I'll give it another whirl since I'm thinking about it and see where I get.

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Trevor Woerner wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >   ok, so what am i looking for?
>
> I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk
> to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image,
> but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I
> tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever
> it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a
> danny-8.0.1 problem).
>
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html
>
> When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of
> packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple
> times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else
> tried reproducing it.
>
> This might be of interest to anyone still using danny.

  so, did you say you were going to try to reproduce this? i don't
want to spend time poking around this if it turns out even *you* can't
make it happen again. :-)

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Trevor Woerner]

On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>   so, did you say you were going to try to reproduce this? i don't
> want to spend time poking around this if it turns out even *you* can't
> make it happen again. :-)

Understood :-)

Yes, I'll try reproducing this and post my results.

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Trevor Woerner]

On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 18:06 -0400, Trevor Woerner wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>> >   ok, so what am i looking for?
>>
>> I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk
>> to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image,
>> but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I
>> tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever
>> it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a
>> danny-8.0.1 problem).
>>
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html
>>
>> When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of
>> packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple
>> times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else
>> tried reproducing it.
>
> I believe I tried and couldn't reproduce it.  But if someone does
> reproduce it, please file a bug detailing the *exact* steps needed to
> reproduce.

https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4423

This is still reproducible. This time I also gave it a try using a
Fedora 18 (64) VM. Lab 3 does not work if you set PACKAGE_CLASSES to
"package_ipk".

Re: working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally

[Darren Hart]

On 04/25/2013 06:30 PM, Trevor Woerner wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@intel.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 18:06 -0400, Trevor Woerner wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>>>>   ok, so what am i looking for?
>>>
>>> I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk
>>> to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image,
>>> but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I
>>> tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever
>>> it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a
>>> danny-8.0.1 problem).
>>>
>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html
>>>
>>> When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of
>>> packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple
>>> times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else
>>> tried reproducing it.
>>
>> I believe I tried and couldn't reproduce it.  But if someone does
>> reproduce it, please file a bug detailing the *exact* steps needed to
>> reproduce.
> 
> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4423
> 
> This is still reproducible. This time I also gave it a try using a
> Fedora 18 (64) VM. Lab 3 does not work if you set PACKAGE_CLASSES to
> "package_ipk".

Thanks, if there is any context missing from the bug, please add it there.

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel