From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] couple autobuilder questions
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 07:04:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160330070449.7a163de2@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFt09wNCmDUwXzDHz_9c5Q=Qun6MecvmBCshPygh4inv+MoeRg@mail.gmail.com>
Hello,
On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 19:12:25 -0500, Matthew Weber wrote:
> > Also, in your discussion, you're focusing on the wrapper being 64 bits,
> > but the wrapper is only the tip of the iceberg: the *entire* toolchain
> > (gcc binaries, binutils binaries, gcc companion libraries) are built
> > for 64 bits.
>
> True, I'd like to add a build machine to the mix which is solely 32bit
> and I'd gladly build the new toolchain variants to add to the mix. We
> have some legacy configurations where pure 32bit hosts are still
> present.
We can already start by fixing the autobuild-run script so that you can
start your autobuilder instance. It will only use those toolchains that
can run on 32 bits machine, but there's a good proportion of them.
And then we can think of rebuilding the Buildroot toolchain for x86
32-bits. Speaking of that, I have on my long term todo list to improve
the way I generate the Buildroot external toolchains, which includes
building them for both x86 32 bits and 64 bits. But I have no idea when
this is going to be ready.
> > * The detection of the failure reason for the autobuild.buildroot.org
> > website is done on the Web server side, not by the autobuild-run
> > script. And the PHP logic was adjusted to take into account the
> > umask handling. See
> > https://git.busybox.net/buildroot-test/commit/?id=e82328cf02a1f0aea90c7c243e8a48dbdb6e53ab.
>
> That doesn't quite work, from my testing it needs the : removed after the make.*
Why ?
Looking at
http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/df3/df36cc9b593b1f28febfb4868d68f084d29262ed/build-end.log,
the interesting line is:
make[1]: *** [/home/buildroot/autobuild/run/instance-2/output/build/jack2-v1.9.10/.stamp_built] Error 1
It does have this ":" after make[1], and the autobuild.b.o website
properly detected the failure reason to be jack2-v1.9.10.
Best regards,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-30 5:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAFt09wMWfXRfi-KYQUXDJL9nnYu=w3cut_XeaoRQiv3_6+uzxw@mail.gmail.com>
2016-03-29 14:05 ` [Buildroot] couple autobuilder questions Thomas Petazzoni
2016-03-29 14:16 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
[not found] ` <CAFt09wNCmDUwXzDHz_9c5Q=Qun6MecvmBCshPygh4inv+MoeRg@mail.gmail.com>
2016-03-30 5:04 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160330070449.7a163de2@free-electrons.com \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox