From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EE3FC43334 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 22:54:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wr1-f45.google.com (mail-wr1-f45.google.com [209.85.221.45]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web09.34113.1658184857023348579 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 15:54:17 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.s=google header.b=cdfIS67p; spf=pass (domain: linuxfoundation.org, ip: 209.85.221.45, mailfrom: richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org) Received: by mail-wr1-f45.google.com with SMTP id bk26so19100568wrb.11 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 15:54:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :content-transfer-encoding:user-agent:mime-version; bh=OyDrorNBRIOOKjIYHrPPY1IIHQTr6wlospgO9X2sSow=; b=cdfIS67pbUF14rqTfdqorn2mtDWQvoYn9GZhH35UinWECdLI3djz7rOQw3GGNihyq5 JESmJXshY4UjL8SjXZpX36zpozwqH4QPK+ib5m+TCBeAiRZkB994ady4pjgyD4t1k2ra 9CeRJS/v+UACE9V/QHm64Kt8V7dWgg8OYcrGA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:content-transfer-encoding:user-agent:mime-version; bh=OyDrorNBRIOOKjIYHrPPY1IIHQTr6wlospgO9X2sSow=; b=t22YgXLjgc9u4g+Onth11KQDXs+3pfpVuRKATUw3BTRbHZ/4wVAsplw26MSim+LtSk qnMCwk3RcSuQxaYYAPAP4eFKTBTXlxOO1m4BQbt8vdoKYOF/igOtSX12TsOhznRL64u2 8SZbrYo/RQyhaOgSxEx1/gix1SjQssIuUHDWn/0J5+c001+HGBeY2kGKiSVKd9dZPWfo AmZ/61TgIsPLVj+lEeXGiWXxpVuKAEyRhbN541OmJYefOZNnbLPqqoWYgV1qkloKjUpu GNevkKVwD9fn1czrryZFcg/yM4YxH1WZzWl3l8KXAyvk0vT9Kq1Q3jquiOnZoJiQUE5t 9gfw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+Oy2qw1vtt8LCC5KfeetcfPjf8mZKeqEwpbj/95k9naAfd0VjN sFs/4D+isbSgAyp+u9YidvaLkg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1s1rulUxZnoyM6dp8HeuU1GGMJyi7fio8B7tdbdLNxMgQbmguh1u007PrxQYEK+Zx+ysa7/Lw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2c6:b0:21d:be55:d311 with SMTP id o6-20020a05600002c600b0021dbe55d311mr22964156wry.154.1658184855347; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 15:54:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:8b0:aba:5f3c:22db:3f70:c684:113a? ([2001:8b0:aba:5f3c:22db:3f70:c684:113a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m2-20020a05600c3b0200b0039ee391a024sm21758404wms.14.2022.07.18.15.54.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 18 Jul 2022 15:54:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <06a78e1a344f8ee4dbf696b56756781a65463f1f.camel@linuxfoundation.org> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v2 2/2] cargo-cross-canadian: Use SDK's flags during target linking From: Richard Purdie To: Otavio Salvador Cc: Khem Raj , Otavio Salvador , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 23:54:13 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <20220710164300.953098-1-otavio@ossystems.com.br> <20220710164300.953098-2-otavio@ossystems.com.br> <8e065ede6abdb6065c862bd8b25cdccf2b6828a8.camel@linuxfoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.1-0ubuntu1 MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 22:54:25 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/168262 On Mon, 2022-07-18 at 18:41 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > Em seg., 18 de jul. de 2022 =C3=A0s 18:18, Richard Purdie > escreveu: > > > It does, indeed, but it doesn't seem related to this PR.=C2=A0 > > >=20 > > > Do you know if this has worked? > > >=20 > > > I am asking as I did all development and testing using=C2=A0SDKMACHIN= E > > > ?=3D > > > 'x86_64' and even=C2=A0MACHINE ?=3D 'qemuarm64' worked just fine. > > > However, > > > looking at some of the logs above, it seems it is using an > > > SDKMACHINE > > > as i686, so this appears as a different issue for me. > > >=20 > >=20 > > rust-cross-canadian hasn't officially worked properly or been > > supported. In assessing whether a patch is better or worse, it is > > useful to know which cases regress and which improve. I had hoped > > this > > list of failures would be smaller. I will admit I don't know > > whether > > this is better or worse than before so I guess that is the next > > thing I > > need to determine. > >=20 >=20 >=20 > I told you. I tried SDKMACHINE as x86_64 on a x86_64 host and this > worked. >=20 > > What we don't know right now is which combinations work and which > > don't > > so we can't even tell people what is expected to work and what > > isn't/doesn't :( > >=20 >=20 >=20 > See above. > =C2=A0 > > I mentioned this report in case someone can work out the pattern, > > or > > even better, understand what a fix looks like... > >=20 >=20 >=20 > I am not familiar enough to Rust boostrap=C2=A0to help here but we spent = a > lot of time to get the SDK working and I think this is a step on the > right direction, at least. Thanks, I do appreciate the patches. I think we've talked cross purposes as I did report my aarch64 test case issue previously and I thought this series was to attempt to fix things so the recipe did work generically. If I merge this to fix x86_64, I think people will then just ignore the other cases and things will remain broken there which worries me a lot and means we can't generically enable rust SDKs for the project and gain autobuilder testing to spot future regressions. Obviously you want your use case fixed though. I will try and evaluate things a bit more tomorrow. What I don't want to do is merge a fix which then makes it harder to get things correctly done in future though, particularly when I know there will be an instant backport request to an LTS as soon as I accept it for master. We never should have accepted these rust cross-canadian recipes at all as they are just broken :(. Cheers, Richard