Re: [PATCH] kernel.bbclass: Don't include source files for "other" architectures in the sysroot

[Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>]

On 05/01/2013 02:05 PM, Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-05-01 at 12:08 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>> You've stated that this successfully removes code on mips, have you also
>> tested that basic module building still works? For example, does
>> hello-mod still build?
> 
> I didn't try hello-mod, but the two (proprietary) out-of-tree modules
> that we routinely build into our own images do still compile and work.
> 
>> Have you confirmed this on any other architectures? I'd like to see a
>> test at least on the core emulated BSPs (or maybe at least 2 of them)
>> before we pull this in as we have spent quite a bit of effort getting
>> modules building to date, I'd hate to break that due to a lack of testing.
> 
> I've tested on arm and mips.  I guess I can set up a build tree for a
> qemu target on some other architecture if you like.


I'd feel more comfortable with a bit more testing as this impacts all
architecture and that sometimes has subtle effects.


>>>  	make -C $kerneldir _mrproper_scripts
>>>  	find $kerneldir -path $kerneldir/lib -prune -o -path $kerneldir/tools -prune -o -path $kerneldir/scripts -prune -o -name "*.[csS]" -exec rm '{}' \;
>>> +	rm -rf $(find $kerneldir/arch -maxdepth 1 -not -path $kerneldir/arch/$ARCH -not -path $kerneldir/arch/Kconfig -not -path $kerneldir/arch/. -not -path $kerneldir/arch)
>>
>> Any particular reason for not using "-exec rm" like the other code
>> removal commands here?
> 
> No, just force of habit.  Using xargs is more performant in general, but
> "find -exec ..." is safer and I guess that's probably what we should do
> here too.

OK, I'll wait for the next version.

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel