From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1T2NsT-0007gz-Ok for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:50:22 +0200 Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Aug 2012 07:37:16 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,785,1336374000"; d="scan'208";a="203562620" Received: from unknown (HELO envy.home) ([10.255.13.26]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Aug 2012 07:37:15 -0700 Message-ID: <502E56A8.3080109@intel.com> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 07:35:20 -0700 From: Darren Hart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120717 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Liang Li References: <1344008589-3660-1-git-send-email-liang.li@windriver.com> <1344348160.9756.255.camel@ted> <20120808033742.GA19078@localhost> <20120814021712.GB25748@localhost> <502D12E2.4000808@windriver.com> <1345132684.14667.70.camel@ted> <20120817033209.GB19625@localhost> <1345196146.14667.84.camel@ted> <20120817100001.GA16621@localhost> <1345200782.26132.18.camel@ted> <20120817130151.GA1416@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20120817130151.GA1416@localhost> Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [discussion] perf: specify SLANG_INC dir for perf 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: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 14:50:22 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 08/17/2012 06:01 AM, Liang Li wrote: > On 2012-08-17 18:53, Richard Purdie wrote: >> On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 18:00 +0800, Liang Li wrote: >>> I am totally confused, you mentioned 'general kernel do_install', I >>> assume it's oe-core kernel.bbclass concept. Then you mentioned 'get >>> the fix upstream in the mainline kernel', how could that happen? >>> >>> We are discussing about the solution to 'fix the compile warning to >>> error' stuff that triggered by the '-I/usr/include/slang', right? >> >> Yes. >> >>> We do not necessarily have to change recipe to fix it since the issue >>> is not introduced by the recipe, the hard coded '-I/usr/include/slang' >>> in the Makefile cause the issue, we can fix the root cause by kernel >>> patch(other than just comment the line out). I see your previous patch >>> to kernel, by comment out the '-I/usr/include/slang' line in the >>> Makefile, is the same behavior, but we won't have the change(comment >>> out -I.. in Makefile) upstream to mainline, right? >> >> I am suggesting that firstly, someone send a patch to the mainline >> kernel which changes -I/usr/include/slang to -I=/usr/include/slang in >> that Makefile. >> >> Secondly, I'm suggesting that we add a line to kernel_do_install() in >> kernel.bbclass which does a sed on the Makefile as installed into >> $kerneldir which changes -I/usr/include/slang to -I=/usr/include/slang. >> >> We can then drop the patch I added to the linux-yocto kernels. >> >> This is all that should be needed, it should fix all the issues people >> have reported in a way that is acceptable to everyone. >> > > Ah, I see what you mean now. But we have push acceptable kernel patch > to linux-yocto kernel first, and propose it to mainline kernel in the > meantime. With proper kernel patch in linux-yocto kernel(s), we does > not have to do the second above, right? :) No, the kernel.bbclass supports more than the linux-yocto kernels. It needs to be generally useful with 2.6+kernels. The sed patch for the kernel.bbclass is still necessary. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel