Re: opkg 0.3.0 or rootfs task

[Alejandro del Castillo <alejandro.delcastillo@ni.com>]

On 11/02/2015 09:31 AM, Christopher Larson wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org <mailto:nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:46 AM, Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com <mailto:clarson@kergoth.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
>             I've just posted patches to the opkg-devel list which should fix this. I had
>             intended to give them a bit more testing before I sent them but a quick fix is
>             needed.
> 
> 
>         Thanks for your quick work on this, Paul, it's much appreciated. From some initial testing, builds are completing now. We'll keep testing it out.
> 
> 
> 
>     I just hit the same issue. I was pointed out to this thread on IRC today. I found the patches on the 0.3.x branch in the opkg git tree. Apart from applying these patches, do i need to do anything in any OE variables to use the newly added options? I am not entirely sure after reading this thread and looking at the patches..
> 
> 
> No, there's nothing else you need to do. The patches fromPaul change the opkg download cache to use checksums rather than the entire url as the filename, which avoids the file name length problem.

The patches are under review on the opkg mailing list: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/opkg-devel/UzDigiuKBcs. I asked Paul for a small modification on one of the patches, once that's done, I will pull them into the opkg repo (and we'll need to update the opkg recipe).

> I would not apply the first patch in the series, however, since that's not related to this. The first patch (memory leak fix) caused double-free failures in glibc in our testing.

yes, the first patch needs to be dropped

-- 
Cheers,

Alejandro