From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from avasout06.plus.net (avasout06.plus.net [212.159.14.18]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1BE1771FC for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 17:32:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from deneb ([80.229.24.9]) by avasout06 with smtp id EhYw1s0070BmcFC01hYxiG; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 17:32:58 +0000 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=Rr04V3SK c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=E/9URZZQ5L3bK/voZ0g0HQ==:117 a=E/9URZZQ5L3bK/voZ0g0HQ==:17 a=L9H7d07YOLsA:10 a=9cW_t1CCXrUA:10 a=s5jvgZ67dGcA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=jFJIQSaiL_oA:10 a=5i4OYfP2o5spmVWWHpwA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 Received: from mac by deneb with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aRkFc-00021H-IZ; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 17:32:56 +0000 Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 17:32:56 +0000 From: Mike Crowe To: Richard Purdie Message-ID: <20160205173256.GA7728@mcrowe.com> References: <1454424587-4251-1-git-send-email-mac@mcrowe.com> <1454428874.27087.87.camel@linuxfoundation.org> <20160202210411.GA20640@mcrowe.com> <1454452885.27087.127.camel@linuxfoundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1454452885.27087.127.camel@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Remove unhelpful default value of EXTRA_OEMAKE 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, 05 Feb 2016 17:33:00 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, 2016-02-02 at 14:49 +0000, Mike Crowe wrote: > > > > [snip] Set EXTRA_OEMAKE = "" in bitbake.conf On Tuesday 02 February 2016 at 16:01:14 +0000, Richard Purdie wrote: > > > Which architectures did you test? Often, x86 is a bad choice here and > > > we'd need something cross (arm/mips/ppc) to ensure it really is doing > > > the right things. We also need to assess a bit more than just sato. > > > We can run this up on the autobuilder and see what happens. On Tue, 2016-02-02 at 21:04 +0000, Mike Crowe wrote: > > I've compile-tested qemux86 and qemuarm for core-image-sato. qemumips > > is building now. Since then I've collected enough patches to make "bitbake world" build successfully for qemux86, qemuarm, qemuppc and qemumips. qemux86-64 is building now. The recipes that needed fixing to explicitly set EXTRA_OEMAKE = "-e MAKEFLAGS=" were: meta/recipes-bsp/apmd/apmd_3.2.2-15.bb meta/recipes-bsp/libacpi/libacpi_0.2.bb meta/recipes-bsp/pciutils/pciutils_3.4.1.bb meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl.inc meta/recipes-devtools/dmidecode/dmidecode_3.0.bb meta/recipes-devtools/fdisk/gptfdisk_1.0.1.bb meta/recipes-devtools/perl/perl-native_5.22.1.bb meta/recipes-devtools/perl/perl_5.22.1.bb meta/recipes-extended/ed/ed_1.9.bb meta/recipes-extended/iputils/iputils_s20151218.bb meta/recipes-extended/pigz/pigz.inc meta/recipes-extended/stat/stat_3.3.bb meta/recipes-extended/sysklogd/sysklogd.inc meta/recipes-extended/unzip/unzip_6.0.bb meta/recipes-gnome/gtk-theme-torturer/gtk-theme-torturer_git.bb meta/recipes-support/ptest-runner/ptest-runner_2.0.bb I will submit patches for these shortly. > > We've been running with the previous version of the patch with our code > > for a while but now I look more closely that solution didn't have > > anywhere near as wide an impact so I'll switch us over to using these > > patches. That will runtime-test a few real mips and arm targets (and > > even x86 and x86-64 to a limited extent) but only with our customised > > set of packages. On Tuesday 02 February 2016 at 22:41:25 +0000, Richard Purdie wrote: > Thanks. Please do mention what tests have passed/failed just so I can > build some idea of the risk of the patch and decide if/as/when the > right time to merge it is. I've not yet done any more runtime tests. I hope to get the change into our tree tonight so everything gets rebuilt with it over the weekend and I can test next week. > > > A post to the architecture list is probably needed so everyone knows > > > this is happening (or at least being considered). I hope to send such a post later today. Mike.