On Fri, 2015-02-20 at 11:52 +0200, Leon Anavi wrote: > Hi, > > Recently I have built Tizen IVI with Yocto and I noted several issues > related to the recipes for libmm-common, libmm-log and crosswalk. I have > posted details at JIRA as well as information about the fixes that I > applied locally: > https://bugs.tizen.org/jira/browse/BTY-104
This is the know "bashism" problem mentioned in the release notes for rev_ivi_2015_02_04 in https://wiki.tizen.org/wiki/Build_Tizen_with_Yocto_Project#rev_ivi_2015_02_04 * bashisms in recipes derived from .spec files. If you are on a distro with /bin/sh linking to dash instead of bash, replace /bin/sh with /bin/bash in tizen-distro/bitbake/lib/bb/build.py. > I am interested in contributing these fixes upstream. Is the following > guide for contributions up to date and valid for changes related to > Tizen on Yocto? > > https://wiki.tizen.org/wiki/How_to_contribute_to_Tizen_IVI These bashism issues should indeed be better fixed in the .spec files and not the .inc files derived from them, so this guide applies. However, it is uncertain whether working with non-bash shell interpreters is a goal for Tizen; at the moment it is not tested for consistently, neither in OBS nor in "Tizen on Yocto". So it is unclear whether maintainers will accept such patches. Worse, such issues may get re-introduced. Overall I think it's easier to accept that .inc files depend on bash and patch build.py in tizen-distro as suggested above. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. _______________________________________________ IVI mailing list IVI@lists.tizen.org https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/ivi
