[Buildroot] [PATCH] mpd: disable for sparcv8

[Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>]

Hi Thomas,
Thomas Petazzoni wrote,

> Dear Waldemar Brodkorb,
> 
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:43:38 +0100, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
> > Even the main source code in mpd requires some missing
> > atomic ops. So only disable some failing plugins, does not
> > solve the following autobuild error:
> > http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/e2207280f3a177e12dba502b1c01f5aeb431d04c/
> > 
> > Leon3 works fine.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
> > ---
> >  package/mpd/Config.in |    2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/package/mpd/Config.in b/package/mpd/Config.in
> > index be0843f..b88c0ca 100644
> > --- a/package/mpd/Config.in
> > +++ b/package/mpd/Config.in
> > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ menuconfig BR2_PACKAGE_MPD
> >  	depends on BR2_USE_MMU # libglib2
> >  	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_4_6
> >  	depends on BR2_PACKAGE_BOOST_ARCH_SUPPORTS
> > +	depends on !BR2_sparc_v8 # feature need atomic ops
> 
> To be honest, I don't really like this solution. I know it is the
> easiest quick fix, but it's not the long-term proper solution.
> 
> Instead, I've started looking at all architectures, to see which of the
> __sync_*() and __atomic_*() builtins are supported, when -latomic is
> needed or not needed, etc. Once we have this picture, we can then
> design how such dependencies should be expressed rather than adding
> more and more architecture exclusions.

May be we can add this patch now and when you figured everything out
to do a clean solution, you just use grep to find the problematic
packages disabled for sparc/sparc64.

Therefore we have some fewer autobuild failures meanwhile.
Other atomic related patches got applied, so we should do this until
your refactoring.

best regards
 Waldemar