* [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support @ 2015-10-25 22:43 Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 8:08 ` Paul Eggleton 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-25 22:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: yocto [Support #16] Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> --- recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend diff --git a/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e5e667 --- /dev/null +++ b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ +do_configure_prepend_rpi() { + cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF' +EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm +QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2 +EOF +} -- 2.6.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-25 22:43 [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-26 8:08 ` Paul Eggleton 2015-10-26 8:24 ` Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 9:15 ` Andrei Gherzan 0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Paul Eggleton @ 2015-10-26 8:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: yocto On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote: > [Support #16] > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> > --- > recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > > diff --git a/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..3e5e667 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ > +do_configure_prepend_rpi() { > + cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF' > +EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm > +QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2 > +EOF > +} I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have other machines enabled in the same distro? Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-26 8:08 ` Paul Eggleton @ 2015-10-26 8:24 ` Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 11:28 ` Otavio Salvador 2015-10-26 9:15 ` Andrei Gherzan 1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-26 8:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Eggleton, yocto; +Cc: Otavio Salvador On 26/10/2015 7:08 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote: >> [Support #16] >> >> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> >> --- >> recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++ >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend >> >> diff --git a/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend >> b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..3e5e667 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend >> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ >> +do_configure_prepend_rpi() { >> + cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF' >> +EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm >> +QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2 >> +EOF >> +} > I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but > does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have > other machines enabled in the same distro? > > Cheers, > Paul > It would rebuild qtbase (and recipes depending on it) without Raspberry Pi support for other machines. I see similar machine-specific do_configure_prepend elsewhere (e.g. https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm/blob/master/qt5-layer/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%25.bbappend). Otavio, any thoughts on a better way to handle this? Regards, Jonathan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-26 8:24 ` Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-26 11:28 ` Otavio Salvador 2015-10-26 11:31 ` Jonathan Liu 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Otavio Salvador @ 2015-10-26 11:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jonathan Liu; +Cc: Paul Eggleton, Otavio Salvador, yocto On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> wrote: > On 26/10/2015 7:08 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > It would rebuild qtbase (and recipes depending on it) without Raspberry Pi > support for other machines. > I see similar machine-specific do_configure_prepend elsewhere (e.g. > https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm/blob/master/qt5-layer/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%25.bbappend). > > Otavio, any thoughts on a better way to handle this? We handle this moving it to a SoC subarch and using a dynamic package arch handler to put every package depending on it as a subarch as well. Ideally we could split the QPA module and build it separated. No clue if it is possible or not. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-26 11:28 ` Otavio Salvador @ 2015-10-26 11:31 ` Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 12:09 ` Otavio Salvador 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-26 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Otavio Salvador; +Cc: Paul Eggleton, Otavio Salvador, yocto On 26/10/2015 10:28 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 26/10/2015 7:08 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: >> It would rebuild qtbase (and recipes depending on it) without Raspberry Pi >> support for other machines. >> I see similar machine-specific do_configure_prepend elsewhere (e.g. >> https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm/blob/master/qt5-layer/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%25.bbappend). >> >> Otavio, any thoughts on a better way to handle this? > We handle this moving it to a SoC subarch and using a dynamic package > arch handler to put every package depending on it as a subarch as > well. Ideally we could split the QPA module and build it separated. No > clue if it is possible or not. > So for meta-fsl-arm, would only the qtbase-plugins package be using machine-specific arch and the other qtbase packages be using non-machine-specific arch? Or is it done on a per-recipe rather than per-package granularity? Regards, Jonathan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-26 11:31 ` Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-26 12:09 ` Otavio Salvador 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Otavio Salvador @ 2015-10-26 12:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jonathan Liu; +Cc: Paul Eggleton, Otavio Salvador, yocto On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> wrote: > On 26/10/2015 10:28 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 26/10/2015 7:08 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: >>> It would rebuild qtbase (and recipes depending on it) without Raspberry >>> Pi >>> support for other machines. >>> I see similar machine-specific do_configure_prepend elsewhere (e.g. >>> >>> https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm/blob/master/qt5-layer/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%25.bbappend). >>> >>> Otavio, any thoughts on a better way to handle this? >> >> We handle this moving it to a SoC subarch and using a dynamic package >> arch handler to put every package depending on it as a subarch as >> well. Ideally we could split the QPA module and build it separated. No >> clue if it is possible or not. > > So for meta-fsl-arm, would only the qtbase-plugins package be using > machine-specific arch and the other qtbase packages be using > non-machine-specific arch? > Or is it done on a per-recipe rather than per-package granularity? We have the handler, which allows for it to be done properly[1]. 1. http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-fsl-arm/tree/conf/machine/include/imx-base.inc#n68 Including 'qtbase' here will make it to move all packages depending on it for the subarch. The real long term solution is to try to split it and make the QPA package machine specific. I don't know if it is possible. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-26 8:08 ` Paul Eggleton 2015-10-26 8:24 ` Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-26 9:15 ` Andrei Gherzan 2015-10-26 9:41 ` Paul Eggleton 1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Andrei Gherzan @ 2015-10-26 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Eggleton; +Cc: yocto Hi Paul, On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 08:08:29AM +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote: > > [Support #16] > > > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> > > --- > > recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++ > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > > > > diff --git a/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > > b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000..3e5e667 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > > @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ > > +do_configure_prepend_rpi() { > > + cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF' > > +EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm > > +QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2 > > +EOF > > +} > > I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but > does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have > other machines enabled in the same distro? > But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting other machines? -- Andrei Gherzan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-26 9:15 ` Andrei Gherzan @ 2015-10-26 9:41 ` Paul Eggleton 2015-10-26 10:48 ` Jonathan Liu 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Paul Eggleton @ 2015-10-26 9:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrei Gherzan; +Cc: yocto On Monday 26 October 2015 10:15:49 Andrei Gherzan wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 08:08:29AM +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: > > On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote: > > > [Support #16] > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> > > > --- > > > > > > recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > > > > > > diff --git a/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > > > b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..3e5e667 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > > > @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ > > > +do_configure_prepend_rpi() { > > > + cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF' > > > +EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm > > > +QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2 > > > +EOF > > > +} > > > > I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, > > but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well > > when you have other machines enabled in the same distro? > > But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting other > machines? If everything works such that the resulting packages get marked as machine- specific and the package manager correctly installs them in preference to the generic architecture packages on the machines in question, then there won't be a massive problem (though the side-effect is probably that any recipes depending on qtbase will also become machine-specific, that is possibly more of an issue). Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-26 9:41 ` Paul Eggleton @ 2015-10-26 10:48 ` Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 10:54 ` Paul Eggleton 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-26 10:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Eggleton, Andrei Gherzan; +Cc: yocto On 26/10/2015 8:41 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Monday 26 October 2015 10:15:49 Andrei Gherzan wrote: >> Hi Paul, >> >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 08:08:29AM +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: >>> On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote: >>>> [Support #16] >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend >>>> >>>> diff --git a/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend >>>> b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 >>>> index 0000000..3e5e667 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ >>>> +do_configure_prepend_rpi() { >>>> + cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF' >>>> +EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm >>>> +QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2 >>>> +EOF >>>> +} >>> I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, >>> but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well >>> when you have other machines enabled in the same distro? >> But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting other >> machines? > If everything works such that the resulting packages get marked as machine- > specific and the package manager correctly installs them in preference to the > generic architecture packages on the machines in question, then there won't be > a massive problem (though the side-effect is probably that any recipes > depending on qtbase will also become machine-specific, that is possibly more of > an issue). > > Cheers, > Paul > Good point. The package arch needs to machine-specific. I will send a v3 to fix this. Regards, Jonathan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-26 10:48 ` Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-26 10:54 ` Paul Eggleton 2015-10-26 11:10 ` Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 11:45 ` Martin Jansa 0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Paul Eggleton @ 2015-10-26 10:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jonathan Liu; +Cc: yocto On Monday 26 October 2015 21:48:24 Jonathan Liu wrote: > On 26/10/2015 8:41 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > > On Monday 26 October 2015 10:15:49 Andrei Gherzan wrote: > >> Hi Paul, > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 08:08:29AM +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: > >>> On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote: > >>>> [Support #16] > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> > >>>> recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++ > >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > >>>> create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > >>>> b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 > >>>> index 0000000..3e5e667 > >>>> --- /dev/null > >>>> +++ b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ > >>>> +do_configure_prepend_rpi() { > >>>> + cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF' > >>>> +EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm > >>>> +QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2 > >>>> +EOF > >>>> +} > >>> > >>> I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, > >>> but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well > >>> when you have other machines enabled in the same distro? > >> > >> But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting > >> other > >> machines? > > > > If everything works such that the resulting packages get marked as > > machine- > > specific and the package manager correctly installs them in preference to > > the generic architecture packages on the machines in question, then there > > won't be a massive problem (though the side-effect is probably that any > > recipes depending on qtbase will also become machine-specific, that is > > possibly more of an issue). > > > > Cheers, > > Paul > > Good point. The package arch needs to machine-specific. I will send a v3 > to fix this. I think that will get taken care of automatically by virtue of the machine- specific override. My question is more about: 1) Will that mechanism entirely work, including desired behaviours in both the build system and the package manager, and 2) Are any side-effects worth it? Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-26 10:54 ` Paul Eggleton @ 2015-10-26 11:10 ` Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 11:45 ` Martin Jansa 1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-26 11:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Eggleton; +Cc: yocto On 26/10/2015 9:54 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Monday 26 October 2015 21:48:24 Jonathan Liu wrote: >> On 26/10/2015 8:41 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: >>> On Monday 26 October 2015 10:15:49 Andrei Gherzan wrote: >>>> Hi Paul, >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 08:08:29AM +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: >>>>> On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote: >>>>>> [Support #16] >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> >>>>>> recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++ >>>>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >>>>>> create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend >>>>>> b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 >>>>>> index 0000000..3e5e667 >>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>> +++ b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend >>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ >>>>>> +do_configure_prepend_rpi() { >>>>>> + cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF' >>>>>> +EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm >>>>>> +QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2 >>>>>> +EOF >>>>>> +} >>>>> I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, >>>>> but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well >>>>> when you have other machines enabled in the same distro? >>>> But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting >>>> other >>>> machines? >>> If everything works such that the resulting packages get marked as >>> machine- >>> specific and the package manager correctly installs them in preference to >>> the generic architecture packages on the machines in question, then there >>> won't be a massive problem (though the side-effect is probably that any >>> recipes depending on qtbase will also become machine-specific, that is >>> possibly more of an issue). >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Paul >> Good point. The package arch needs to machine-specific. I will send a v3 >> to fix this. > I think that will get taken care of automatically by virtue of the machine- > specific override. My question is more about: > > 1) Will that mechanism entirely work, including desired behaviours in both the > build system and the package manager, and > > 2) Are any side-effects worth it? > > Cheers, > Paul > It wasn't automatically taken care of. I checked the package architecture and it was incorrect with the v2 patch. The machine-specific architecture has a higher priority (from my reading of the opkg handling) so opkg at least should prefer it if a more generic architecture package is also present. I haven't tested it thoroughly though. It seems worth it to have OpenGL ES graphics acceleration. Regards, Jonathan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support 2015-10-26 10:54 ` Paul Eggleton 2015-10-26 11:10 ` Jonathan Liu @ 2015-10-26 11:45 ` Martin Jansa 1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Martin Jansa @ 2015-10-26 11:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Eggleton; +Cc: yocto [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2956 bytes --] On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:54:43AM +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Monday 26 October 2015 21:48:24 Jonathan Liu wrote: > > On 26/10/2015 8:41 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > > > On Monday 26 October 2015 10:15:49 Andrei Gherzan wrote: > > >> Hi Paul, > > >> > > >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 08:08:29AM +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: > > >>> On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote: > > >>>> [Support #16] > > >>>> > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com> > > >>>> --- > > >>>> > > >>>> recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++ > > >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > >>>> create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > > >>>> > > >>>> diff --git a/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > > >>>> b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 > > >>>> index 0000000..3e5e667 > > >>>> --- /dev/null > > >>>> +++ b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend > > >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ > > >>>> +do_configure_prepend_rpi() { > > >>>> + cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF' > > >>>> +EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm > > >>>> +QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2 > > >>>> +EOF > > >>>> +} > > >>> > > >>> I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, > > >>> but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well > > >>> when you have other machines enabled in the same distro? > > >> > > >> But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting > > >> other > > >> machines? > > > > > > If everything works such that the resulting packages get marked as > > > machine- > > > specific and the package manager correctly installs them in preference to > > > the generic architecture packages on the machines in question, then there > > > won't be a massive problem (though the side-effect is probably that any > > > recipes depending on qtbase will also become machine-specific, that is > > > possibly more of an issue). > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Paul > > > > Good point. The package arch needs to machine-specific. I will send a v3 > > to fix this. > > I think that will get taken care of automatically by virtue of the machine- > specific override. My question is more about: machine-specific override to set PACKAGE_ARCH works only when it's used as subdirectory in SRC_URI, doesn't it? And it sets it only for qtbase, not all other recipes which depend on qtbase (see my other reply in this thread). > 1) Will that mechanism entirely work, including desired behaviours in both the > build system and the package manager, and > > 2) Are any side-effects worth it? > > Cheers, > Paul > > -- > > Paul Eggleton > Intel Open Source Technology Centre > -- > _______________________________________________ > yocto mailing list > yocto@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com [-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-10-26 12:09 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-10-25 22:43 [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH v2] qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 8:08 ` Paul Eggleton 2015-10-26 8:24 ` Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 11:28 ` Otavio Salvador 2015-10-26 11:31 ` Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 12:09 ` Otavio Salvador 2015-10-26 9:15 ` Andrei Gherzan 2015-10-26 9:41 ` Paul Eggleton 2015-10-26 10:48 ` Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 10:54 ` Paul Eggleton 2015-10-26 11:10 ` Jonathan Liu 2015-10-26 11:45 ` Martin Jansa
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.