On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Koen Kooi <k...@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote: > > Op 22 sep. 2011, om 15:28 heeft Bruce Ashfield het volgende geschreven: > >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Koen Kooi <k...@dominion.thruhere.net> >> wrote: >>> >>> Op 22 sep. 2011, om 15:00 heeft Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov het volgende >>> geschreven: >>> >>>> On 09/22/2011 04:35 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Op 22 sep. 2011, om 14:25 heeft Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov het volgende >>>>> geschreven: >>>>> >>>>>> On 09/18/2011 02:23 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>>>>>> I have sent this in July and it was nacked. See at >>>>>>> https://github.com/OSSystems/oe-core/commit/5c53cbf951a11ed92fb2ad0837991db256c11489 >>>>>> >>>>>> Answering the original question by Saul: >>>>>> A possible better question is why perf-dbg is getting generated and >>>>>> what's in it? >>>>>> >>>>>> perf and perf-dbg are generated to contain perf tool if it's not >>>>>> directly enabled (AFAIK), but you can compile it by running make in >>>>>> tools/perf. It has some additional depends (like binutils-dev, >>>>>> elfutils-dev, news-dev, etc., so it's not enabled by default. Probably >>>>>> we should enable it though. >>>>> >>>>> the oe core kernel.bbclass builds perf by default >>>> >>>> according to kernel.bbclass: "perf must be enabled in individual kernel >>>> recipes" >>> >>> And pretty much everything uses recipes-kernel/linux/linux-tools.inc, which >>> enables it. I had to add do_compile_perf() { : } to my old kernel recipes >>> that have a broken perf, so it's opt-out, not opt-in. >> >> We can always flip this around if required. When I initially did the kernel >> tree based builds for perf it was right in a specific kernel recipe, and then >> pulled it out into linux-tools.inc for easier reuse it was the intention that >> just including/requiring that .inc file would trigger a build of perf. > > > I'm not complaining about perf being built, I'm complaining that the patch is > held up on a question why perf-dbg is getting built. If 'perf' is in the > blacklist, 'perf-dbg' should be in as well. If 'perf-dbg' isn't allowed in, > take out 'perf' as well, since they are a matched pair.
Aha. Yes, I see that now. I'm generally quite bad at packaging so I sometimes need to be pointed right at something :) As for getting it in or out of the tree, I'm only one voice, but I don't see a downside to this being on the blacklist as well. Cheers, Bruce > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > -- "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end" _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
