From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from tygrysek.juszkiewicz.com.pl (tygrysek.juszkiewicz.com.pl [178.33.81.99]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 115AE6A9D1 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 07:55:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by tygrysek.juszkiewicz.com.pl (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 505E6D231C; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 09:55:42 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on tygrysek.juszkiewicz.com.pl X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 Received: from [192.168.1.112] (87-206-60-225.dynamic.chello.pl [87.206.60.225]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: marcin@juszkiewicz.com.pl) by tygrysek.juszkiewicz.com.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA592D22F9 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 09:55:12 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <51B6D7DA.1060609@juszkiewicz.com.pl> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 09:55:06 +0200 From: Marcin Juszkiewicz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130529 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <1370165592-15697-1-git-send-email-net147@gmail.com> <51AB1684.1080500@juszkiewicz.com.pl> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 OpenPGP: id=117A251E Subject: Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] llvm3.2: new recipe X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 07:55:41 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit W dniu 11.06.2013 09:48, Khem Raj pisze: > On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:55 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz > wrote: >> W dniu 02.06.2013 11:33, Jonathan Liu pisze: >>> +def get_llvm_arch(d): >>> + import bb; >>> + >>> + arch = bb.data.getVar('TARGET_ARCH', d, 1) >>> + >>> + if arch == "x86_64" or arch == "i486" or arch == "i586" or arch == "i686": >>> + arch = "x86" >>> + elif arch == "x86_64": >>> + arch = "x86_64" >>> + elif arch == "arm": >>> + arch = "arm" >>> + elif arch == "mipsel" or arch == "mips": >>> + arch = "mips" >>> + elif arch == "powerpc" or arch == "powerpc64": >>> + arch = "powerpc" >>> + else: >>> + bb.warn("%s does not support %s yet" % (bb.data.getVar('PN', d, 1), arch) ); >>> + >>> + return arch >> >> Can we get rid of such blocks? They are worthless and only generate >> extra support questions when OE newbies use OE with 'not supported' >> architectures. > why do you think they are worthless ? when they give good information > instead of failing to build and then generating support question > which need more work to come to same conclusion $ MACHINE=genericarmv8 bitbake nano "llvm is not supported" "openjdk is not supported" "another-thing-you-do-not-care-for-this-build is not supported" This is how your builds look for not supported architectures. OE has COMPATIBLE_HOST variable which can be used by recipe maintainers to mark which architectures are supported.