qte-4.8.5 missing libQtUiToolsE.a on toolchain

qte-4.8.5 missing libQtUiToolsE.a on toolchain

[Diego Sueiro]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 770 bytes --]

Folks,

I was trying to use meta-toolchain-qte on dora branch, but when building
some examples from Qt, the compiler raised this error:

/usr/local/oecore-x86_64/sysroots/x86_64-angstromsdk-linux/usr/libexec/arm-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/gcc/arm-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/4.8.2/ld:
cannot find -lQtUiToolsE
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** [calculator] Error 1


If I copy libQtUiToolsE.a
to /usr/local/oecore-x86_64/sysroots/armv7ahf-vfp-neon-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/usr/lib/
the build works.

libQtUiToolsE.a is just present at qt4-embedded-staticdev package.
Shouldn't it needed to be added to meta-toolchain-qte?


Regards,

--
*dS
Diego Sueiro

Administrador do Embarcados
www.embarcados.com.br

/*long live rock 'n roll*/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1152 bytes --]

Re: qte-4.8.5 missing libQtUiToolsE.a on toolchain

[Diego Sueiro]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 380 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Diego Sueiro <diego.sueiro@gmail.com>wrote:

> libQtUiToolsE.a is just present at qt4-embedded-staticdev package.
> Shouldn't it needed to be added to meta-toolchain-qte?


Should I have to send a patch to fix this?


Regards,

--
*dS
Diego Sueiro

Administrador do Embarcados
www.embarcados.com.br

/*long live rock 'n roll*/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 863 bytes --]

Re: qte-4.8.5 missing libQtUiToolsE.a on toolchain

[Richard Purdie]

On Thu, 2014-02-13 at 15:56 -0200, Diego Sueiro wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Diego Sueiro
> <diego.sueiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>         libQtUiToolsE.a is just present at qt4-embedded-staticdev
>         package. Shouldn't it needed to be added to
>         meta-toolchain-qte?
> 
> Should I have to send a patch to fix this?

Well, if you build static binaries you need the staticdev packages. By
default we assume people tend to use dynamic libraries and the SDK is
therefore setup that way.

So I'm not sure there is any need to "fix" anything, the system is
working as designed. If you want to improve the documentation, I'm sure
Scott would love some help with that though.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: qte-4.8.5 missing libQtUiToolsE.a on toolchain

[Diego Sueiro]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 730 bytes --]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Richard Purdie <
richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Well, if you build static binaries you need the staticdev packages. By
> default we assume people tend to use dynamic libraries and the SDK is
> therefore setup that way.
>

Richard,
Looking at qt4-embedded build results it just produces the static library
for QtUiToolsE and file ./lib/libQtUiToolsE.prl point to a static library.

As soon as I'm not a Qt expert, I don't know if its possible to generate a
shared library for uitools. And googling for it I couldn't found
any helpful information.

Regards,

--
*dS
Diego Sueiro

Administrador do Embarcados
www.embarcados.com.br

/*long live rock 'n roll*/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1454 bytes --]

Re: qte-4.8.5 missing libQtUiToolsE.a on toolchain

[Khem Raj]

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Diego Sueiro <diego.sueiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> Well, if you build static binaries you need the staticdev packages. By
>> default we assume people tend to use dynamic libraries and the SDK is
>> therefore setup that way.
>
>
> Richard,
> Looking at qt4-embedded build results it just produces the static library
> for QtUiToolsE and file ./lib/libQtUiToolsE.prl point to a static library.
>

then package the needed static library in -dev package. Now its not
recommended practice however sometimes
exceptions are made but I would recommend to check first if its an
oversight/bug in QT5 to not generate a .so
for the given library or it could be a architectural need to have it
static either way some clarification is needed
before this change is made

> As soon as I'm not a Qt expert, I don't know if its possible to generate a
> shared library for uitools. And googling for it I couldn't found any helpful
> information.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> *dS
> Diego Sueiro
>
> Administrador do Embarcados
> www.embarcados.com.br
>
> /*long live rock 'n roll*/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>

Re: qte-4.8.5 missing libQtUiToolsE.a on toolchain

[Diego Sueiro]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 897 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:

> then package the needed static library in -dev package. Now its not
> recommended practice however sometimes
> exceptions are made but I would recommend to check first if its an
> oversight/bug in QT5 to not generate a .so
> for the given library or it could be a architectural need to have it
> static either way some clarification is needed
> before this change is made
>

Khem,

Looking at some references it seems that qt just builds the static library:
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/37447
http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/epel/6/x86_64/qt5-qttools-static-5.2.0-1.el6.x86_64.html
http://fr2.rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/opensuse/factory/armv7hl/armv7hl/libqt4-devel-4.8.5-10.1.armv7hl.html

Regards,

--
*dS
Diego Sueiro

Administrador do Embarcados
www.embarcados.com.br

/*long live rock 'n roll*/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1893 bytes --]

Re: qte-4.8.5 missing libQtUiToolsE.a on toolchain

[Diego Sueiro]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 954 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Diego Sueiro <diego.sueiro@gmail.com>wrote:

> then package the needed static library in -dev package. Now its not
>> recommended practice however sometimes
>> exceptions are made but I would recommend to check first if its an
>> oversight/bug in QT5 to not generate a .so
>> for the given library or it could be a architectural need to have it
>> static either way some clarification is needed
>> before this change is made
>>
>
> Khem,
>
> Looking at some references it seems that qt just builds the static library:
> https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/37447
>
> http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/epel/6/x86_64/qt5-qttools-static-5.2.0-1.el6.x86_64.html
>
> http://fr2.rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/opensuse/factory/armv7hl/armv7hl/libqt4-devel-4.8.5-10.1.armv7hl.html
>

Any conclusions?

Regards,

--
*dS
Diego Sueiro

Administrador do Embarcados
www.embarcados.com.br


/*long live rock 'n roll*/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2166 bytes --]

Re: qte-4.8.5 missing libQtUiToolsE.a on toolchain

[Khem Raj]

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 7:56 AM, Diego Sueiro <diego.sueiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Diego Sueiro <diego.sueiro@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>>
>>> then package the needed static library in -dev package. Now its not
>>> recommended practice however sometimes
>>> exceptions are made but I would recommend to check first if its an
>>> oversight/bug in QT5 to not generate a .so
>>> for the given library or it could be a architectural need to have it
>>> static either way some clarification is needed
>>> before this change is made
>>
>>
>> Khem,
>>
>> Looking at some references it seems that qt just builds the static
>> library:
>> https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/37447
>>
>> http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/epel/6/x86_64/qt5-qttools-static-5.2.0-1.el6.x86_64.html
>>
>> http://fr2.rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/opensuse/factory/armv7hl/armv7hl/libqt4-devel-4.8.5-10.1.armv7hl.html
>
>
> Any conclusions?
>

Well. Do the needed in packaging it accordingly then

LXC - linux container support in OE

[Dorairaj, Sanjay]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 536 bytes --]

Hi Folks,

Can someone let me know the current state of OE support for LXC containers? Is the current implementation of LXC support stable enough to be used in a fielded product? Has anyone implemented this in their products and if so, are there any lessons-learnt or case studies that could be shared?

I see that there are recipes in place for this - http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-virtualization/tree/recipes-containers/lxc/lxc_0.9.0.bb?h=master

Appreciate the help!

Regards,

Sanjay Dorairaj
Comcast


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1830 bytes --]

Re: LXC - linux container support in OE

[Bruce Ashfield]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Dorairaj, Sanjay
<Sanjay_Dorairaj@cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> Can someone let me know the current state of OE support for LXC containers?
> Is the current implementation of LXC support stable enough to be used in a
> fielded product? Has anyone implemented this in their products and if so,
> are there any lessons-learnt or case studies that could be shared?

Everything you need to created, deploy and manage LXC containers is part
of oe-core + meta-virt (and dependencies).

After that, it really depends on what you want to do with the containers .. but
yes, they've been used and deployed on top of a yocto base.

Cheers,

Bruce

>
> I see that there are recipes in place for this -
> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-virtualization/tree/recipes-containers/lxc/lxc_0.9.0.bb?h=master
>
> Appreciate the help!
>
> Regards,
>
> Sanjay Dorairaj
> Comcast
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>



-- 
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
thee at its end"

Re: LXC - linux container support in OE

[Khem Raj]

Hi Sanjay

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Dorairaj, Sanjay
<Sanjay_Dorairaj@cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> Can someone let me know the current state of OE support for LXC containers?
> Is the current implementation of LXC support stable enough to be used in a
> fielded product? Has anyone implemented this in their products and if so,
> are there any lessons-learnt or case studies that could be shared?
>
> I see that there are recipes in place for this -
> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-virtualization/tree/recipes-containers/lxc/lxc_0.9.0.bb?h=master
>
> Appreciate the help!

I have deployed containers from yocto however it was using a different
kernel version. We ran into issues when number of containers grew to
be
large, e.g. file sytem accesses on base kernel took the CPU, we also
experienced severe degradation in network traffic when containers grew
larger
than 1000, we were using 1Gig link and there were plans to use 10Gig interfaces.

We experimented first with containers made out of ubuntu system which
were quite large in size and the problems  with file systems showed
very easly
however the yocto containers were very small in size approx 20M in
size compared to 300M ubuntu containers, and we could launch 1000
containers
so the size of the container seemed to matter.

The base system running the container was ubuntu system so we do not
know if systemd could have helped us with resource allocation.

The box underneath was with 16G of RAM with Haswell CPU.



>
> Regards,
>
> Sanjay Dorairaj
> Comcast
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>

Re: LXC - linux container support in OE

[Dorairaj, Sanjay]

Khem/Bruce,

Thanks for the input!

We are not looking at using more than a handful of containers. Just need
to secure a few of the more critical applications running on our set-tops,
so, hopefully, this should not be a problem. I will keep the group posted
on our progress and report on any issues we find.

Regards,

Sanjay Dorairaj
Comcast





On 2/13/14 9:45 PM, "Khem Raj" <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hi Sanjay
>
>On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Dorairaj, Sanjay
><Sanjay_Dorairaj@cable.comcast.com> wrote:
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> Can someone let me know the current state of OE support for LXC
>>containers?
>> Is the current implementation of LXC support stable enough to be used
>>in a
>> fielded product? Has anyone implemented this in their products and if
>>so,
>> are there any lessons-learnt or case studies that could be shared?
>>
>> I see that there are recipes in place for this -
>> 
>>http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-virtualization/tree/recipe
>>s-containers/lxc/lxc_0.9.0.bb?h=master
>>
>> Appreciate the help!
>
>I have deployed containers from yocto however it was using a different
>kernel version. We ran into issues when number of containers grew to
>be
>large, e.g. file sytem accesses on base kernel took the CPU, we also
>experienced severe degradation in network traffic when containers grew
>larger
>than 1000, we were using 1Gig link and there were plans to use 10Gig
>interfaces.
>
>We experimented first with containers made out of ubuntu system which
>were quite large in size and the problems  with file systems showed
>very easly
>however the yocto containers were very small in size approx 20M in
>size compared to 300M ubuntu containers, and we could launch 1000
>containers
>so the size of the container seemed to matter.
>
>The base system running the container was ubuntu system so we do not
>know if systemd could have helped us with resource allocation.
>
>The box underneath was with 16G of RAM with Haswell CPU.
>
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Sanjay Dorairaj
>> Comcast
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>>