From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.dream-property.net ([82.149.226.172]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKTpX-0000iO-4W for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:17:51 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.dream-property.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BDD9315B371 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:08:26 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.dream-property.net Received: from mail.dream-property.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.dream-property.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 4HB8vYfEG-6a for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:08:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.200.6.10] (unknown [82.149.226.166]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.dream-property.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C3056315B380 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:08:13 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4F8EAEAC.4080605@opendreambox.org> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:08:12 +0200 From: Andreas Oberritter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org References: <4F847380.6000401@windriver.com> <4F8489DE.1050905@opendreambox.org> <4F8C24CB.3080607@opendreambox.org> <1334587325.616.4.camel@ted> <4F8C379A.3070903@opendreambox.org> <4F8C3B19.40400@windriver.com> <4F8EA5CC.6010101@opendreambox.org> <1334749226.24091.67.camel@ted> <4F8EA972.1090304@opendreambox.org> <20120418115428.GJ3635@jama.jama.net> <1334750426.24091.73.camel@ted> In-Reply-To: <1334750426.24091.73.camel@ted> Subject: Re: MIPS vs MIPS32 tunings -- summary and questions 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: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:17:51 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 18.04.2012 14:00, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 13:54 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 01:45:54PM +0200, Andreas Oberritter wrote: >>> On 18.04.2012 13:40, Richard Purdie wrote: >>>> On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 13:30 +0200, Andreas Oberritter wrote: >>>>> now, after having repacked all binary tarballs that had mipsel or >>>>> mipsel-nf in their name and contents, and after having changed all >>>>> occurrences of mipsel and mipsel-nf in my local recipes (where >>>>> appropriate), and after having rebuilt everything from scratch again, it >>>>> came to my attention that "mipsel" in PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS breaks opkg, >>>>> because no mipsel packages are being generated. That's what I told >>>>> before, right? >>>> >>>> How is this breaking opkg? We often have architectures listed in there >>>> for which there are no packages generated (all, noarch and any spring to >>>> mind)? >>> >>> Downloading http://10.0.0.1/mipsel/Packages.gz. >>> wget: server returned error: HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found >>> Collected errors: >>> * opkg_download: Failed to download http://10.0.0.1/mipsel/Packages.gz, wget returned 1. >> >> I had a lot of those (e.g. because armv7a-vfp-neon was including 20 >> arm*feed.conf variants in /etc/opkg most of them empty - without >> Packages.gz). >> >> So I've added "filter" to distro-feed-configs >> http://git.shr-project.org/git/?p=meta-smartphone.git;a=commit;h=236aa553bb0f82f741c6edb793e96f421f24f4fa >> to add only feeds I'm generating (and I also don't want armv5* packages >> installed on armv7a-vfp-neon target unless user explicitly adds armv5* >> feed). > > This is the better solution. I think we need to get a better default > feed-config generation mechanism into the core. Distros may still need > to tweak it but it would be good to share some of the best practises... Did you look at the patch? Which default setting of SUPPORTED_EXTRA_ARCHS do you suggest? Do you think it's feasible to add every single downloadable arch to this variable? If a user of my distro decides to build it for some arm or x86 cpu, should he need to know which archs to add at this place? I don't think that's user-friendly and I don't know what's so bad about removing something that probably hasn't helped anybody. Regards, Andreas