Re: u-boot-fw-utils -> u-boot-fw-utils-cross

[Hans Beckerus <hans.beckerus@gmail.com>]

On 2013-09-13 7:32, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Anders Darander <anders@chargestorm.se> wrote:
>> As I've started to bring our internal distro and machines up to the
>> lates oe-core, I've got some issues with the u-boot-fw-utils to
>> u-boot-fw-utils-cross transition.
> Right.
>
>> In my old branch, I used u-boot-fw-utils_2011.06. This used to compile
>> and package fw_printenv(setenv) just fine.
>>
>> In the new, u-boot-fw-utils-cross_2013.07.bb, fw_printenv is now built
>> using HOSTCC instead of the cross-compiler. The old recipe used to
>> include:
>> EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'HOSTCC="${CC}"'
>> as u-boot defaults to build everything under tools/ using HOSTC.
> Yes; this is intended to be used in the host. I can add support for
> use in target as well (or help you to do it).
Honestly I do not understand this change at all? fw_printenv typically 
*always* executes on the target since it dumps the contents of the 
U-boot environment from a shell. Why would you want to build it for the 
host? That does not make sense. Unless host is the same as your target 
which I doubt could be considered the normal case, or?

Thanks.
Hans

>> What's the reason for this change? Currently fw_printenv is being built
>> for my host system, and not the target...
> Yes; the way to proper package it for target is from u-boot itself,
> not on this recipe.
>
>> Further more, fw_printenv does not get packaged. I can see that
>> fw_printenv is installed in ${WORKDIR}/image, but never moved to
>> ${WORKDIR}/package. I guess that this is caused by inheriting
>> cross.bbclass?
>>
>> Am I missing something in my distro config, or have I overlooked
>> something else? fw_printenv doesn't really make sense for me to run on
>> the host, and is (in my case) rather essential on the target.
>>
>> I guess that I'm doing something wrong; can anyone give me some hint on
>> where to look? Or do we have an issue with the u-boot-fw-utils-cross
>> recipe?
> No, you are right. I can help you to solve it (or solve it and send
> you the solution) if you want.
>