On Friday 28 June 2013 10:42:29 Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-06-28 at 17:33 +0800, Kang Kai wrote:
> > On 2013年06月28日 17:00, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > > Hi Kai,
> > >
> > > On Friday 28 June 2013 15:48:47 Kai Kang wrote:
> > >> Because qt could not be built on mips64 with 64 bits userspace, set
> > >> COMPATIBLE_HOST for qt related packagegroups to disable them on mips64
> > >> with 64 bit userspace too.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Kai Kang <kai.k...@windriver.com>
> > >> ---
> > >>
> > >> .../packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt.bb | 3 +++
> > >> .../packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt4e.bb | 3 +++
> > >> .../packagegroup-qt-toolchain-target.inc | 3 +++
> > >> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt.bb
> > >> b/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt.bb index
> > >> 315df33..c993242 100644
> > >> --- a/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt.bb
> > >> +++ b/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt.bb
> > >> @@ -6,6 +6,9 @@ DESCRIPTION = "Qt package groups"
> > >>
> > >> LICENSE = "MIT"
> > >> PR = "r4"
> > >>
> > >> +# Qt4 could NOT be built on MIPS64 with 64 bits userspace
> > >> +COMPATIBLE_HOST_mips64 = "mips64.*-linux-gnun32"
> > >> +
> > >>
> > >> inherit packagegroup
> > >>
> > >> PACKAGES = "${PN}-demoapps"
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt4e.bb
> > >> b/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt4e.bb index
> > >> 9263828..6ef844f 100644
> > >> --- a/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt4e.bb
> > >> +++ b/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt4e.bb
> > >> @@ -2,6 +2,9 @@ SUMMARY = "Qt for Embedded Linux (Qt without X11)"
> > >>
> > >> PR = "r2"
> > >> LICENSE = "MIT"
> > >>
> > >> +# Qt4 could NOT be built on MIPS64 with 64 bits userspace
> > >> +COMPATIBLE_HOST_mips64 = "mips64.*-linux-gnun32"
> > >> +
> > >>
> > >> inherit packagegroup
> > >>
> > >> # For backwards compatibility after rename
> > >>
> > >> diff --git
> > >> a/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-qt-toolchain-target.inc
> > >> b/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-qt-toolchain-target.inc
> > >> index
> > >> 8413eec..fc1ccba 100644
> > >> ---
> > >> a/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-qt-toolchain-target.inc
> > >> +++
> > >> b/meta/recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-qt-toolchain-target.inc
> > >> @@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
> > >>
> > >> LICENSE = "MIT"
> > >>
> > >> +# Qt4 could NOT be built on MIPS64 with 64 bits userspace
> > >> +COMPATIBLE_HOST_mips64 = "mips64.*-linux-gnun32"
> > >> +
> > >>
> > >> inherit packagegroup
> > >>
> > >> PACKAGEGROUP_DISABLE_COMPLEMENTARY = "1"
> > >
> > > I'm fine with the other change; the question is is this one needed in
> > > addition? Since the packagegroup-*qt* recipes reference packages from
> > > Qt which itself inherits qt4x11/qt4e bbclasses, surely trying to build
> > > these will immediately fail for mips64 anyway?
> >
> > Yes, it will fail immediately. What I want to do is to underline these
> > packagegroups' build platform.
> > If you believe that they are redundant, I retrieve the patch 2/2.
>
> At a guess the one advantage of this is to clean up what "bitbake world"
> would show?
OK, I don't have any strong objections if it does help in some way.
Cheers,
Paul
--
Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
