From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "Cui, Dexuan" <dexuan.cui@intel.com>
Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] bash: make job control really work
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 10:35:06 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1320230106.20107.23.camel@ted> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1865303E0DED764181A9D882DEF65FB6D836780D9E@shsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 15:10 +0800, Cui, Dexuan wrote:
> Richard Purdie wrote on 2011-11-01:
> > On Tue, 2011-11-01 at 16:05 +0800, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> >> It turns out 9393ff833f44570fd5f500bc9de6c72db94b0296 didn't really
> >> fix the bug.
> >>
> >> This patch is made and tested after I read the link below
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/bug-bash@gnu.org/msg03107.html
> >>
> >> [YOCTO #487]
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Dexuan Cui <dexuan.cui@intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> meta/recipes-extended/bash/bash.inc | 1 +
> >> meta/recipes-extended/bash/bash_4.2.bb | 2 +-
> >> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-extended/bash/bash.inc
> >> b/meta/recipes-extended/bash/bash.inc
> >> index d55e517..d495538 100644
> >> --- a/meta/recipes-extended/bash/bash.inc
> >> +++ b/meta/recipes-extended/bash/bash.inc
> >> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ ALTERNATIVE_LINK = "${base_bindir}/sh"
> >> ALTERNATIVE_PRIORITY = "100"
> >>
> >> do_configure () { + export bash_cv_job_control_missing=present
> >> gnu-configize oe_runconf }
> >
> > This really should go into the common site files...
> Hi Richard,
> I found we do define the variable:
> meta/site/common-linux:33:bash_cv_job_control_missing=${bash_cv_job_control_missing=present}
> but looks autoconf doesn't realize the variable has been assigned the value 'present'?
> I think this is because of the below do_configure in bash.inc -- looks autoreconf is skipped?
> do_configure () {
> gnu-configize
> oe_runconf
> }
> Why do we need a customized do_configure to replace autotools_do_configure?
>
> Later, after I added
> do_configure_prepend () {
> autoreconf -f -i -s
> }
> The generated config.log does show bash_cv_job_control_missing is assigned with 'present'.
> (BTW, common-linux also introduces many other variables -- would this be safe? Actually here I only need to introduce bash_cv_job_control_missing.)
>
> However, finally, do_compile got a strange failure:
> | shell.c: In function 'shell_reinitialize':
> | shell.c:1742:20: error: 'PPROMPT' undeclared (first use in this function)
> | shell.c:1742:20: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> | shell.c:1743:22: error: 'SPROMPT' undeclared (first use in this function)
>
> Could you please give some suggestions?
This is why its a really bad idea for recipes to have their own
configure rather than using our core one :/.
I had a go at this problem myself and it took a bit of figuring out. The
problem is that bash ships "config.h.in" but autoheader overwrites it.
This removes the start/end includes from config.h or config-bot.h and
config-top.h. We can do something like this:
export AUTOHEADER = "true"
do_configure_prepend () {
if [ ! -e acinclude.m4 ]; then
cat aclocal.m4 > acinclude.m4
fi
}
instead of the current do_configure override. The _prepend ensures the
bash specific macros are preserved and the export AUTOHEADER stops
autoheader from running at all.
Could you test those changes against bash 4.x and bash 3.x (replacing
the current do_configure in bash.inc) and then if that works send a
patch please?
Cheers,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-02 10:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-01 8:05 [PATCH 0/1] fix bug 487 Dexuan Cui
2011-11-01 8:05 ` [PATCH 1/1] bash: make job control really work Dexuan Cui
2011-11-01 10:21 ` Richard Purdie
2011-11-02 7:10 ` Cui, Dexuan
2011-11-02 10:35 ` Richard Purdie [this message]
2011-11-02 11:41 ` [PATCH] bash: Ensure we fully reautoconf the recipes so site data is used Richard Purdie
2011-11-02 15:48 ` [PATCH 1/1] bash: make job control really work Cui, Dexuan
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=1320230106.20107.23.camel@ted \
--to=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=dexuan.cui@intel.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/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