From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f175.google.com (mail-io0-f175.google.com [209.85.223.175]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EC3D77CF3 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 18:26:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f175.google.com with SMTP id r16so11570757ioi.2 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 11:26:57 -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=yKM4e/dFBk6vulQ09Tqmo9D3S9kQbPTqizowLG+aSkA=; b=A/xArxK9c7Gpv8/GE9xzohSSDh5+dkAtH0cDJYz1Xc2eh7VWHnajdIGgS9tZPGkljM GIiGNyCzXYf16DsV645y4Vh/kB8OWwqm1GSLGDU/8MtX4N3MXOCCtJQ5/hw2hClfBiB8 4Xx7gv/0yGIyOywHNWkeEb0WI7K/vYnfhlLtYkI1oPBIoLL+bgxn+ws/maoR/ERYPzA+ UR9wFp/AAkiTFIvoEj2jLROWFW/nFf6VbgrqaH/hjxDJwejfNR9JJkwsqIMAJfS8CTKw 0m4JopeibP8PAUr+w1BWwCD/3OTMGViGQeZBg9P7CT835tzjJFeUR44fx8w4IB4entGr HUSg== 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=yKM4e/dFBk6vulQ09Tqmo9D3S9kQbPTqizowLG+aSkA=; b=U/EAGSpVJOaU8uBUAQmlj7Cm+RVraGxYwT9sUhcSgr49/AxgpNn9kzugr7aaFvL9VS JaXYaFvzMWE36E8JX491OIQwK6G0Yye6PB7R+q8iyevTWrKai0eeehgkzLBNGpWEVTsE NRzU1q9vF2xfBLOuSpNFaTGgGhptXkCjxouBNiYK9zQ8HOOQcUnhlYHTJ+bKbzPgtxo/ qmyatJdmcwFGtvgnPXge1tVOF63kiLhZWBHar5JPDDAHRV4JBpiqv42nuA5d7s1egG97 omfCxOJ1mdiUGFSAAdEY/dmwwgbjVfJB9z5Ep1F/dbZ/WFOtXFCzp+riTjTzoJb3bmrq ntXw== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/7hRf83G37WwWJJbsGA5lpYdSwj+XahisqBhi+/AiKdmvOPzWE2fMz9HFM0/KLi1JoU X-Received: by 10.36.123.16 with SMTP id q16mr18687492itc.52.1491935216782; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 11:26:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8D3A2.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.211.162]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 9sm1242365itm.6.2017.04.11.11.26.54 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Apr 2017 11:26:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1491935213.10884.208.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Khem Raj Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:26:53 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <1491828558.10884.112.camel@intel.com> <1491928471.10884.196.camel@intel.com> <1491929552.10884.199.camel@intel.com> Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: OpenEmbedded Subject: Re: go-cross: incorrect dependency on tune-specific libgcc 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: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 18:26:56 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 10:01 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 9:52 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 09:39 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > >> I think TUNE_PKGARCH is the granularity it needs for setting GOARM > >> anyway. > > > > So you are saying the patch that I had proposed initially in this mail > > thread (go-cross-${TARGET_ARCH} -> go-cross-${TUNE_PKGARCH}) is the > > right solution? > > no, dependency on libgcc should be removed from go cross if possible. > Its similar to gcc in that regard. Good that I asked, because I understood "TUNE_PKGARCH is the granularity it needs" as the exact opposite ;-} The "if possible" part is where it gets tricky. There's this comment next to the DEPENDS saying "libgcc is required for the target specific libraries to build properly" and I simply have no idea how obviously it'll break when removing the dependency in go-cross. Anyway, I'll proceed down that route by rewriting the go.inc. Note that Richard correctly pointed out that the inclusion of go-1.8.bb in go-cross-1.8.bb isn't particularly clean, making such a change a bit more complicated. But I don't want to move content around too much just for this, so I'll leave the cleanup to the go maintainers. -- 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.