From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QszUZ-00053n-Eo for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 17:54:19 +0200 Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Aug 2011 08:49:42 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,351,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="37920881" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.255.18.70]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Aug 2011 08:49:41 -0700 From: Paul Eggleton To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 16:49:40 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.38-10-generic-pae; KDE/4.6.2; i686; ; ) References: <201108142050.37352.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> <1313420625.6733.182.camel@phil-desktop> In-Reply-To: <1313420625.6733.182.camel@phil-desktop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201108151649.40904.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> Cc: Phil Blundell Subject: Re: Machine specific sysroot issue 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: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 15:54:19 -0000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Monday 15 August 2011 16:03:44 Phil Blundell wrote: > I can't immediately think why this should be behaving differently to any > other library (eglibc for example). It's quite normal for those > packages to be architecture-specific and not machine-specific. > > What I think is meant to happen when you change MACHINE is that > populate_sysroot will rerun (because ${MACHINE} is factored into the > stamp for that task) but it will use all the previously cached build > artifacts from sstate and hence you won't end up having to rebuild > everything. It sounds as if that isn't happening in this case for some > reason, though I can't immediately think what libopie2 might be doing to > defeat it. > > Is it just include.pro that goes wrong, or does the whole of libopie2 go > missing from the sysroot when you change MACHINE? Actually it's just include.pro - everything else gets copied to the sysroot for the new machine just fine. I've sort of figured this out. include.pro is getting installed to the sysroot and not ${D} in do_install (and it's the only file handled this way). I'm guessing that because of this it never gets picked up by sstate. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre