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 1Twugd-0002BE-Q2 for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Sun, 20 Jan 2013 14:11:48 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r0KCuI3f008629; Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:56:18 GMT 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 04722-04; Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:56:14 +0000 (GMT) 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 r0KCu8Xe008623 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:56:09 GMT Message-ID: <1358686568.14265.20.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Holger Hans Peter Freyther Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:56:08 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20130119084426.GH15126@xiaoyu.lan> References: <1358519642-31022-1-git-send-email-holger@moiji-mobile.com> <50F993A7.30308@linux.intel.com> <20130119084426.GH15126@xiaoyu.lan> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] archiver.bbclass: Archive the native builds as well X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 13:11:49 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sat, 2013-01-19 at 09:44 +0100, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 10:25:43AM -0800, Saul Wold wrote: > > > > I understand what the issue is here, but I am not sure this is the > > right solution. This will likely bring in way more than is wanted or > > needed for source archiving. > > > > What's needed from the opkg-utils-native? > > IANAL so let me say it is company/personal policy to release more than > would be the minimumm specially to avoid corner cases like we have with > gcc/libgcc. > > I think there are some issues.. > > a.) Missing option to tarball everything. I can prepare a patch for that. > > b.) At least libgcc sources not being present. > > c.) How can I get back to compliance? I would have to use something like > the old DISTRO_PR after I patched the archiver class and rebuild everything. > How can this be handled today? I have installations in the field that I > want to upgrade, so the PR of each package should increase. > > d.) Verify that for the meta-toolchain target the necessary GCC sources > are archived. > > cheers > holger > > PS: Re-sent from the right address >From a technical perspective, I think gcc could be breaking for two reasons: a) It uses the "shared sources" functionality so there is one ${S} directory for all the different targets. I'm not sure if the archiver class interacts well with that. b) libgcc is a "stub" recipe which packages pieces built by a cross recipe and stashed in the sysroot. The recipe is important as it is a "target" recipe rather than the other cross recipes. I'm not sure how removing "native" from the class helps either of these two things though. Its not like we have a gcc-native or a libgcc-native. So there could well be a problem here but I'm not feeling happy we've solved it yet. More information would be appreciated. Cheers, Richard