I am wondering if this patch was overlooked, as I have seen no commentary
regarding it, and the two other patches which accompanied it have been
merged into the meta-oe libhugetlbfs recipe already.
I added explicit arch designators for the typically-used 32-bit intel
architectures so the recipe could be built for those platforms and not just
for 64-bit intel platforms.
Thanks & have a happy holiday season!
Gary Robertson
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Gary S. Robertson <
gary.robert...@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> From: "Gary S. Robertson" <gary.robert...@linaro.org>
>
> COMPATIBLE_HOST included support for x86_64 but not for
> 32-bit x86 architectures - added generic 32-bit x86 arch names
>
> Upstream Status - not applicable - recipe change only
>
> Signed-off-by: Gary S. Robertson <gary.robert...@linaro.org>
> ---
> .../libhugetlbfs/libhugetlbfs_git.bb | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-benchmark/libhugetlbfs/libhugetlbfs_git.bb
> b/meta-oe/recipes-benchmark/libhugetlbfs/libhugetlbfs_git.bb
> index c2262ea..737acb9 100644
> --- a/meta-oe/recipes-benchmark/libhugetlbfs/libhugetlbfs_git.bb
> +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-benchmark/libhugetlbfs/libhugetlbfs_git.bb
> @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ SRC_URI = "git://git.code.sf.net/p/libhugetlbfs/code \
>
> S = "${WORKDIR}/git"
>
> -COMPATIBLE_HOST = "(x86_64|powerpc|powerpc64|aarch64|arm).*-linux*"
> +COMPATIBLE_HOST =
> "(i386|i486|i586|i686|x86_64|powerpc|powerpc64|aarch64|arm).*-linux*"
>
> LIBARGS = "LIB32=${baselib} LIB64=${baselib}"
> LIBHUGETLBFS_ARCH = "${TARGET_ARCH}"
> --
> 1.7.9.5
>
>
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
