From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SIyQA-0006aK-NR for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Sat, 14 Apr 2012 10:33:26 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q3E8O0Lu012319; Sat, 14 Apr 2012 09:24:00 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 09992-08; Sat, 14 Apr 2012 09:23:55 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q3E8NmfJ012312 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 14 Apr 2012 09:23:50 +0100 Message-ID: <1334391830.7309.87.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 09:23:50 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <36ED13F3654AE54CA763E6821D93A5711043A0E3@szxeml534-mbs.china.huawei.com> <4F88A76C.2000308@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: Sanil kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH] boost: fix re-execution of task X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 08:33:27 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 19:14 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Saul Wold wrote: > > On 04/13/2012 04:42 AM, Venkata ramana gollamudi wrote: > >> > >> After building boost package, re-execution of boostconfig task followed by > >> re-execution of compile task is giving following error > >> "error: duplicate initialization of gcc with the following parameters" > >> during compilation > >> It is because multiple entries of gcc are being added during boostconfig > >> re-execution > >> there by failing the compilation. > >> > >> The patch fixes adding multiple "Using gcc" entries into > >> /tools/build/v2/user-config.jam > >> > >> [Yocto #2194] > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Venkata Ramana Gollamudi > >> --- > >> meta/recipes-support/boost/boost.inc | 6 +++++- > >> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/boost/boost.inc > >> b/meta/recipes-support/boost/boost.inc > >> index d70a7e2..c9306df 100644 > >> --- a/meta/recipes-support/boost/boost.inc > >> +++ b/meta/recipes-support/boost/boost.inc > >> @@ -135,7 +135,11 @@ BJAM_OPTS = '${BJAM_TOOLS} \ > >> do_boostconfig() { > >> cp -f boost/config/platform/linux.hpp > >> boost/config/platform/linux-gnueabi.hpp > >> > >> - echo 'using gcc : 4.3.1 : ${CXX} : compileflags > >> -DBOOST_SP_USE_PTHREADS -I${includedir} linkflags -L${libdir} ;'>> > >> ${S}/tools/build/v2/user-config.jam > >> + # D2194:Fixing the failure of "error: duplicate initialization of > >> gcc with the following parameters" during compilation. > >> + if ! grep -qe "^using gcc : 4.3.1" > >> ${S}/tools/build/v2/user-config.jam > >> + then > >> + echo 'using gcc : 4.3.1 : ${CXX} : compileflags > >> -DBOOST_SP_USE_PTHREADS -I${includedir} linkflags -L${libdir} ;'>> > >> ${S}/tools/build/v2/user-config.jam > >> + fi > >> } > >> > >> addtask do_boostconfig after do_patch before do_configure > > > > > > Merged into OE-Core > > I had some feedback on this patch series. I wonder if it was so meaningless. I'd taken it before your feedback, the merge email was just a bit later :(. I'm really struggling to get fixes into the tree yet keep things building and stable for -rc4 at the moment. I've been disappointed with the lack of testing some patches have had. I accelerated getting some things in so that they could get good exposure on the autobuilder at least. FWIW, D2194 is referencing the Yocto bugzilla, not any other internal defect tracking system. I'll take patches to improve comments but I really want to get some of the rebuilding issues fixed for release as people keep hitting them and they're a pain. Cheers, Richard