[PATCH 1/2] ti-xdais: Move LIC_FILES_CHKSUM into recipe.

[PATCH 1/2] ti-xdais: Move LIC_FILES_CHKSUM into recipe.

[Jacob Stiffler]

* This is version specific, so it should not be in a version-agnostic
  include file.

Signed-off-by: Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com>
---
 recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais.inc           |    7 +------
 recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb |    3 +++
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais.inc b/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais.inc
index 9514ce6..2e7eb13 100644
--- a/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais.inc
+++ b/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais.inc
@@ -3,13 +3,9 @@ HOMEPAGE = "http://software-dl.ti.com/dsps/dsps_public_sw/sdo_sb/targetcontent/x
 LICENSE = "GPLv2"
 SECTION = "devel"
 
-LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://xdais_6_26_01_03_manifest.html;md5=a5a675d49db2f658bb98746ec80cda4e"
-
 require ../includes/ti-paths.inc
 require ../includes/ti-staging.inc
 
-PR = "r1"
-
 S = "${WORKDIR}/xdais_${PV}"
 
 SRC_URI = "http://software-dl.ti.com/dsps/dsps_public_sw/sdo_sb/targetcontent/xdais/${PV}/exports/xdais_${PV}.tar.gz;name=xdaistarball"
@@ -17,5 +13,4 @@ SRC_URI = "http://software-dl.ti.com/dsps/dsps_public_sw/sdo_sb/targetcontent/xd
 do_install() {
     install -d ${D}${XDAIS_INSTALL_DIR_RECIPE}
     cp -pPrf ${S}/* ${D}${XDAIS_INSTALL_DIR_RECIPE}
-} 
-
+}
diff --git a/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb b/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb
index 0451b2d..3d35863 100644
--- a/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb
+++ b/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb
@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 require ti-xdais.inc
 
 PV = "6_26_01_03"
+PR = "r1"
+
+LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://xdais_6_26_01_03_manifest.html;md5=a5a675d49db2f658bb98746ec80cda4e"
 
 SRC_URI[xdaistarball.md5sum] = "9b2bea3408254e737ec0d819a031adf6"
 SRC_URI[xdaistarball.sha256sum] = "d7bcbd8bcfe6fdfc5f402e4b125ced6c806dc30bc5296e98d5d43b0b5a237a0d"
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Jacob Stiffler]

Signed-off-by: Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com>
---
 recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_7.24.00.04.bb |   10 ++++++++++
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_7.24.00.04.bb

diff --git a/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_7.24.00.04.bb b/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_7.24.00.04.bb
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0f27514
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_7.24.00.04.bb
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+require ti-xdais.inc
+
+PV = "7_24_00_04"
+
+LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://xdais_7_24_00_04_Manifest.html;md5=fd16442230745f0877cfe1c622669fd6"
+
+SRC_URI[xdaistarball.md5sum] = "f7514085b531f2ae49b37b30194e4989"
+SRC_URI[xdaistarball.sha256sum] = "79fd30377ab4c497292aeefb0565f81703d9020d1242b02ca9968c561e0de9a1"
+
+INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Khem Raj]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 157 bytes --]


> On May 8, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com> wrote:
> 
> +INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"

can this be fixed instead ?

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Jacob Stiffler]

I was following the precedent set by existing RTOS packages (See 
recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb).

These RTOS packages are build only dependencies, and they do not get 
installed into the target filesystem. They are primarily used for 
building firmware.

On 5/8/2015 12:23 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On May 8, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com> wrote:
>>
>> +INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
> can this be fixed instead ?

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:17:42PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
> I was following the precedent set by existing RTOS packages (See
> recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb).
> 
> These RTOS packages are build only dependencies, and they do not get
> installed into the target filesystem. They are primarily used for
> building firmware.

Should they be "-native" then?


> On 5/8/2015 12:23 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> >>On May 8, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>+INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
> >can this be fixed instead ?
> 
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> meta-ti mailing list
> meta-ti@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Jacob Stiffler]

On 5/19/2015 4:11 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:17:42PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
>> I was following the precedent set by existing RTOS packages (See
>> recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb).
>>
>> These RTOS packages are build only dependencies, and they do not get
>> installed into the target filesystem. They are primarily used for
>> building firmware.
> Should they be "-native" then?
>
I suppose they should be, but this is how is was done before.

If you look at recipes-ti/includes/ti-paths.inc, you'll see that all 
paths point into STAGING_DIR_TARGET

>> On 5/8/2015 12:23 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>> On May 8, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
>>> can this be fixed instead ?
>> -- 
>> _______________________________________________
>> meta-ti mailing list
>> meta-ti@yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:29:46AM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/19/2015 4:11 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> >On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:17:42PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
> >>I was following the precedent set by existing RTOS packages (See
> >>recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb).
> >>
> >>These RTOS packages are build only dependencies, and they do not get
> >>installed into the target filesystem. They are primarily used for
> >>building firmware.
> >Should they be "-native" then?
> >
> I suppose they should be, but this is how is was done before.
> 
> If you look at recipes-ti/includes/ti-paths.inc, you'll see that all
> paths point into STAGING_DIR_TARGET

Ok, we may end up doing this on the target at some point.
Can we simply FILES_${PN} += "*" to pick up everything installed and shove it 
into the package? That way we won't need INSANE_SKIP and the build deps can be 
used on the target in the future...


> >>On 5/8/2015 12:23 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> >>>>On May 8, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>+INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
> >>>can this be fixed instead ?
> >>-- 
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>meta-ti mailing list
> >>meta-ti@yoctoproject.org
> >>https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti
> 

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Jacob Stiffler]

On 5/22/2015 2:12 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:29:46AM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
>>
>> On 5/19/2015 4:11 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:17:42PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
>>>> I was following the precedent set by existing RTOS packages (See
>>>> recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb).
>>>>
>>>> These RTOS packages are build only dependencies, and they do not get
>>>> installed into the target filesystem. They are primarily used for
>>>> building firmware.
>>> Should they be "-native" then?
>>>
>> I suppose they should be, but this is how is was done before.
>>
>> If you look at recipes-ti/includes/ti-paths.inc, you'll see that all
>> paths point into STAGING_DIR_TARGET
> Ok, we may end up doing this on the target at some point.
> Can we simply FILES_${PN} += "*" to pick up everything installed and shove it
> into the package? That way we won't need INSANE_SKIP and the build deps can be
> used on the target in the future...
>

Adding all of these files to the ${PN} package causes them to be pulled 
into the filesystem. Should these instead go into the ${PN}-dev package 
(they are purely development files), and then ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"?

>>>> On 5/8/2015 12:23 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>>>> On May 8, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
>>>>> can this be fixed instead ?
>>>> -- 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> meta-ti mailing list
>>>> meta-ti@yoctoproject.org
>>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Jacob Stiffler]

On 5/28/2015 12:20 PM, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
>
>
> On 5/22/2015 2:12 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:29:46AM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/19/2015 4:11 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:17:42PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
>>>>> I was following the precedent set by existing RTOS packages (See
>>>>> recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb).
>>>>>
>>>>> These RTOS packages are build only dependencies, and they do not get
>>>>> installed into the target filesystem. They are primarily used for
>>>>> building firmware.
>>>> Should they be "-native" then?
>>>>
>>> I suppose they should be, but this is how is was done before.
>>>
>>> If you look at recipes-ti/includes/ti-paths.inc, you'll see that all
>>> paths point into STAGING_DIR_TARGET
>> Ok, we may end up doing this on the target at some point.
>> Can we simply FILES_${PN} += "*" to pick up everything installed and 
>> shove it
>> into the package? That way we won't need INSANE_SKIP and the build 
>> deps can be
>> used on the target in the future...
>>
>
> Adding all of these files to the ${PN} package causes them to be 
> pulled into the filesystem. Should these instead go into the ${PN}-dev 
> package (they are purely development files), and then 
> ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"?
>

Just looked more into this... It got pulled in because I was including a 
dev package in the filesystem.

>>>>> On 5/8/2015 12:23 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>>>>> On May 8, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
>>>>>> can this be fixed instead ?
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> meta-ti mailing list
>>>>> meta-ti@yoctoproject.org
>>>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti
>

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:20:21PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/22/2015 2:12 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> >On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:29:46AM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
> >>
> >>On 5/19/2015 4:11 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> >>>On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:17:42PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
> >>>>I was following the precedent set by existing RTOS packages (See
> >>>>recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb).
> >>>>
> >>>>These RTOS packages are build only dependencies, and they do not get
> >>>>installed into the target filesystem. They are primarily used for
> >>>>building firmware.
> >>>Should they be "-native" then?
> >>>
> >>I suppose they should be, but this is how is was done before.
> >>
> >>If you look at recipes-ti/includes/ti-paths.inc, you'll see that all
> >>paths point into STAGING_DIR_TARGET
> >Ok, we may end up doing this on the target at some point.
> >Can we simply FILES_${PN} += "*" to pick up everything installed and shove it
> >into the package? That way we won't need INSANE_SKIP and the build deps can be
> >used on the target in the future...
> >
> 
> Adding all of these files to the ${PN} package causes them to be
> pulled into the filesystem. Should these instead go into the
> ${PN}-dev package (they are purely development files), and then
> ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"?

Actually, that's a good idea. Should we modify other recipes similarly, when 
they only provide build dependencies for DSP?


> >>>>On 5/8/2015 12:23 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> >>>>>>On May 8, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>+INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
> >>>>>can this be fixed instead ?
> >>>>-- 
> >>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>meta-ti mailing list
> >>>>meta-ti@yoctoproject.org
> >>>>https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti
> 

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Jacob Stiffler]

On 5/29/2015 3:37 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:20:21PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
>>
>> On 5/22/2015 2:12 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:29:46AM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
>>>> On 5/19/2015 4:11 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:17:42PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
>>>>>> I was following the precedent set by existing RTOS packages (See
>>>>>> recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These RTOS packages are build only dependencies, and they do not get
>>>>>> installed into the target filesystem. They are primarily used for
>>>>>> building firmware.
>>>>> Should they be "-native" then?
>>>>>
>>>> I suppose they should be, but this is how is was done before.
>>>>
>>>> If you look at recipes-ti/includes/ti-paths.inc, you'll see that all
>>>> paths point into STAGING_DIR_TARGET
>>> Ok, we may end up doing this on the target at some point.
>>> Can we simply FILES_${PN} += "*" to pick up everything installed and shove it
>>> into the package? That way we won't need INSANE_SKIP and the build deps can be
>>> used on the target in the future...
>>>
>> Adding all of these files to the ${PN} package causes them to be
>> pulled into the filesystem. Should these instead go into the
>> ${PN}-dev package (they are purely development files), and then
>> ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"?
> Actually, that's a good idea. Should we modify other recipes similarly, when
> they only provide build dependencies for DSP?
>

It seems this would make the most sense.

Should I submit patches for the recently updated packages which would be 
effected? They are the following:
* ti-sysbios
* ti-xdais

I'm not sure about ti-xdctools since this includes xdc and other utilities.

>>>>>> On 5/8/2015 12:23 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>>>>>> On May 8, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
>>>>>>> can this be fixed instead ?
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> meta-ti mailing list
>>>>>> meta-ti@yoctoproject.org
>>>>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ti-xdais: Add version 7.24.00.04

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 08:52:45AM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/29/2015 3:37 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> >On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:20:21PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
> >>
> >>On 5/22/2015 2:12 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> >>>On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:29:46AM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
> >>>>On 5/19/2015 4:11 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> >>>>>On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:17:42PM -0400, Jacob Stiffler wrote:
> >>>>>>I was following the precedent set by existing RTOS packages (See
> >>>>>>recipes-ti/xdais/ti-xdais_6.26.01.03.bb).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>These RTOS packages are build only dependencies, and they do not get
> >>>>>>installed into the target filesystem. They are primarily used for
> >>>>>>building firmware.
> >>>>>Should they be "-native" then?
> >>>>>
> >>>>I suppose they should be, but this is how is was done before.
> >>>>
> >>>>If you look at recipes-ti/includes/ti-paths.inc, you'll see that all
> >>>>paths point into STAGING_DIR_TARGET
> >>>Ok, we may end up doing this on the target at some point.
> >>>Can we simply FILES_${PN} += "*" to pick up everything installed and shove it
> >>>into the package? That way we won't need INSANE_SKIP and the build deps can be
> >>>used on the target in the future...
> >>>
> >>Adding all of these files to the ${PN} package causes them to be
> >>pulled into the filesystem. Should these instead go into the
> >>${PN}-dev package (they are purely development files), and then
> >>ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"?
> >Actually, that's a good idea. Should we modify other recipes similarly, when
> >they only provide build dependencies for DSP?
> >
> 
> It seems this would make the most sense.
> 
> Should I submit patches for the recently updated packages which
> would be effected? They are the following:
> * ti-sysbios
> * ti-xdais

Let me push what I already have to not delay it any longer. Please send a 
followup patch to update FILES_${PN}-dev - could be a single patch across 
recipes. Thanks.


> I'm not sure about ti-xdctools since this includes xdc and other utilities.
> 
> >>>>>>On 5/8/2015 12:23 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> >>>>>>>>On May 8, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Jacob Stiffler <j-stiffler@ti.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>+INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
> >>>>>>>can this be fixed instead ?
> >>>>>>-- 
> >>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>>meta-ti mailing list
> >>>>>>meta-ti@yoctoproject.org
> >>>>>>https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti
>