Re: [dora][regression] mesa failed to build

[Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com>]

On 04/11/2014 09:56 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com> wrote:
>> On 04/07/2014 10:55 PM, Valentin Popa wrote:
>>> Indeed the build failure was introduced by that patch, which enters a
>>> logical
>>> conflict with the bbappend file for mesa.
>>> To remain compatible with the future releases I suggest to  not remove/add
>>> flags
>>> from/to EXTRA_OECONF explicitly, and make  use of what PACKAGECONFIG
>>> contains.
>>> The first part of the __anonymous function from the bbappend file can be
>>> simply
>>> replaced with:
>>>
>>> PACKAGECONFIG_remove = "egl"
>>>
>>> and the second part with:
>>>
>>> PROVIDES_remove = "virtual/libgles1 virtual/libgles2 virtual/egl"
>>> and
>>> PROVIDES_remove = "virtual/libgl" if mx6 is in SOC_FAMILY.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Otavio,
>>
>> Does Valentin's suggestions work for you, please?
>
> I am traveling and won't be able to test it.
>
> However I am quite surprise this didn't come out /before/ when the
> dora updates were in test in AB since meta-fsl-arm is tested in AB
> too. We need to figure /why/ this broke and for now I think we ought
> to revert this dora patch.
>
> This kind of change needs to be coordinated and raise a build break in
> an Yocto Project is unacceptable IMO.
>
> For me it is clear this didn't run in AB before merging. :(
>

I'm sorry about that, I had run it on my *local* AB before merging, but
the local AB is less powerful and doesn't include the meta-fsl-arm layer,
I'm fine to revert it, what's RP and valentin's opinion, please ?

// Robert