[Buildroot] Build failure with Vivante and QT5 w/ eglfs

[Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com>]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 02:58:37PM +0100, Gary Bisson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Antoine Tenart
> <antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 12:02:31PM +0100, Gary Bisson wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Antoine Tenart
> >> <antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I've run into a build failure while compiling an image, when building
> >> > QT5. I made some build tests to narrow down the issue and found the
> >> > configuration leading to this: when compiling an image with both
> >> > BR2_PACKAGE_QT5BASE_EGLFS and BR2_PACKAGE_IMX_GPU_VIV_OUTPUT_X11 the
> >> > build fails with the following error:
> >> >
> >> > http://code.bulix.org/qxj1bn-92391?raw
> >>
> >> Indeed that's a problem. It looks like the question has been raised in
> >> the Yocto community not so long ago:
> >> https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm/commit/da8f520a
> >>
> >> It looks like their patch is to define EGL_API_FB although X11 is in
> >> use. I imagine we could do the same using J?r?me's approach but
> >> depending on EGLFS define:
> >> https://git.buildroot.net/buildroot/tree/package/freescale-imx/imx-gpu-viv/imx-gpu-viv.mk#n55
> >>
> >> However I guess that would only fix the build but would cause issues
> >> at runtime which might be confusing for users.
> >
> > It's not possible to ensure every possible configuration will be
> > working. A simple example would be to compile a bootloader for a board A
> > and a kernel for a completely different board B.
> >
> > Here, the configuration leading to this build error does not make sense.
> > So if we only fix the build, leading to an unusable image I guess that
> > would be OK. (And fixing the build is important, for build bots for
> > example).
> 
> I agree but here Thomas gave a green light on modifying the qtbase
> package directly for this corner case which fixes both the build and
> possible runtime issues.

Reading Thomas' mail, I don't think he gave a green light on this.

So we still have to choose a solution to fix this (which may be the one
directly modifying the qt5base package, but we first need to agree on
the solution).

Antoine

-- 
Antoine T?nart, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20160307/c534fe30/attachment.asc>