From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f50.google.com (mail-it0-f50.google.com [209.85.214.50]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6C53779AD for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 07:20:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f50.google.com with SMTP id m27so15616777iti.1 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 00:20:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TRXtlrGiRf68WAaQE6Dh5aQdGUiAqlWaCp/HQAPAgIM=; b=d+iWLLvoGxVKSysBRRBCp7b+c/GKwV0cSlW2db9ozGtvGuCM0KGsf7fj3DU1wMS3Ut YCwv2vFRXVlK0FbDroeRrRKK+hCspgCEpVRnoMrOsBjIL1W8jM0zq4pjwsoYLnPviJdC WvvIviDwF47bgtp/hbcKB6zEZp+qCvBpv2ZVIRCi8LVYZLAYm3Hjn/Cae84YlmwpnBG7 3aZc2hDmqZ5swrxDdAlkJs0BE/TOw4ZFqZa2DpBhyY6eWw7UB5W3qHB6Mf3ZFl8Z/cqp rxrVwbQPgvTvuFNJ+8AP4o/e8nN9vTghhiNyBaVvF2vTDu3ICly/klD9vdSrlfhDtP3/ NQSA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TRXtlrGiRf68WAaQE6Dh5aQdGUiAqlWaCp/HQAPAgIM=; b=joqflF9RY2DU1ujgk15zTHzvRzRWwpeyJIQggYVTtWY5AEx08P3FZ+QHpDwVr40iiG 0/3htEQb5i323I8ZY6Z+Lr4yNzDRcyZ8nC9A6WlNM6/6pgSCbUs3SIp/S96PMK/hUgA9 xYLER+S9xO0Ul7CpegfCDtD9sxAQQEE2sdscvjpo0rLGF45ALkqvYwa6FMjGCapNaWac bbr6QDs2f9AmbqA1ePZw7WdFA8qT8/6iXM/LFhXmQ/W+WJUm6JeVXEF4MO+eBc31Kz/c zfBHyc2XHm04X1l6WjKA9mLfZmIefy8dyWdGMS1WUe3W/Ivf721TIucJz5AGfMoAvIYa MUcg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3gTooRgAM6nd/fmfTOEcyskSmrwj44Tew9ZcCrbdZEN0qvk3vikZmK6VILqnRs9rsj X-Received: by 10.107.175.5 with SMTP id y5mr15412777ioe.7.1489735240593; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 00:20:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8C17C.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.193.124]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y42sm732493ita.26.2017.03.17.00.20.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 17 Mar 2017 00:20:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1489735236.6396.136.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: "Burton, Ross" Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 08:20:36 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: OE-core Subject: Re: [PATCH] rm_work.bbclass: re-enable recursive do_rm_work_all X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 07:20:40 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 22:32 +0000, Burton, Ross wrote: > If I do a build with rm_work enabled I tend to get this error at > rootfs time: > > > ERROR: core-image-sato-1.0-r0 do_image_wic: Error executing a python > function in exec_python_func() autogenerated: .... > Exception: FileExistsError: [Errno 17] File exists: > '/data/poky-master/tmp/sysroots-components/corei7-64/glibc/usr/lib/crt1.o' -> '/data/poky-master/tmp/work/intel_corei7_64-poky-linux/core-image-sato/1.0-r0/recipe-sysroot/usr/lib/crt1.o' > > > ERROR: core-image-sato-1.0-r0 do_image_wic: Function failed: > extend_recipe_sysroot > ERROR: Logfile of failure stored > in: /data/poky-master/tmp/work/intel_corei7_64-poky-linux/core-image-sato/1.0-r0/temp/log.do_image_wic.21552 > ERROR: Task > (/home/ross/Yocto/poky/meta/recipes-sato/images/core-image-sato.bb:do_image_wic) failed with exit code '1' > > > Reverting this patch makes it go away. I think I have seen that before, but not necessarily (not sure anymore) in the context of rm_work. If I remember correctly, these were really two different crt1.o files, one from glibc, the other from glibc-initial. I couldn't reproduce it at that time. I'll check whether I can trigger it now. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.