[oe] Building for multiple machines
Hi, What should I do build for multiple machines ? I have an overo-oe repository, but I need to temporarily build u-boot for a different board. In my auto.conf, the entry is MACHINE=overo u-boot board definitions for say beagleboard, have named the board beagle So, would an appropriate command be bitbake u-boot-omap3 MACHINE=beagle Elvis Dowson ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCH] prboom_2.5.0.bb: fix compilation failure due to undefined references.
Need to #define _GNU_SOURCE for sched.h to define CPU_ZERO/CPU_SET.
SDL/libsdldoom.a(i_system.o): In function `I_SetAffinityMask':
| i_system.c:(.text+0x7d4): undefined reference to `CPU_ZERO'
| i_system.c:(.text+0x7e8): undefined reference to `CPU_SET'
| collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
Signed-off-by: Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com
---
.../prboom-2.5.0/gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch | 12
recipes/prboom/prboom_2.5.0.bb |3 ++-
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 recipes/prboom/prboom-2.5.0/gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch
diff --git a/recipes/prboom/prboom-2.5.0/gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch
b/recipes/prboom/prboom-2.5.0/gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000..e77917a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes/prboom/prboom-2.5.0/gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+Upstream:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=4CB2549C.2030100%40gmail.comforum_name=prboom-devel
+
+--- prboom-2.5.0/src/SDL/i_system.c.orig 2010-10-11 09:58:02.0
+1030
prboom-2.5.0/src/SDL/i_system.c2010-10-11 09:59:16.0 +1030
+@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
+
*-
+ */
+
++#define _GNU_SOURCE
+ #include stdio.h
+
+ #include stdarg.h
diff --git a/recipes/prboom/prboom_2.5.0.bb b/recipes/prboom/prboom_2.5.0.bb
index 92a276d..13f3623 100644
--- a/recipes/prboom/prboom_2.5.0.bb
+++ b/recipes/prboom/prboom_2.5.0.bb
@@ -4,10 +4,11 @@ PRIORITY = optional
DEPENDS = virtual/libsdl libsdl-mixer libsdl-net
LICENSE = GPL
-PR = r2
+PR = r3
RRECOMMENDS_${PN} = freedoom
SRC_URI = ${SOURCEFORGE_MIRROR}/prboom/prboom-${PV}.tar.gz \
+ file://gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch \
inherit autotools
--
1.7.1
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCH] ion: move to obsolete.
This recipe has been marked BROKEN for 5 years or so. Signed-off-by: Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com --- recipes/ion/ion3/201_fix-paths.diff | 93 -- recipes/ion/ion3/202_fix-menus.diff | 49 -- recipes/ion/ion3/203_fix-kludges.diff | 15 --- recipes/ion/ion3/204_fix-bindings.diff | 11 -- recipes/ion/ion3/205_ion-lock.diff | 118 --- recipes/ion/ion3/206_use-xterm.diff | 10 -- recipes/ion/ion3/cross.patch| 49 -- recipes/ion/ion3/luaconfig.patch| 27 - recipes/ion/ion3_0.0+ds20041104.bb | 37 --- recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/201_fix-paths.diff| 93 ++ recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/202_fix-menus.diff| 49 ++ recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/203_fix-kludges.diff | 15 +++ recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/204_fix-bindings.diff | 11 ++ recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/205_ion-lock.diff | 118 +++ recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/206_use-xterm.diff| 10 ++ recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/cross.patch | 49 ++ recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/luaconfig.patch | 27 + recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3_0.0+ds20041104.bb | 37 +++ 18 files changed, 409 insertions(+), 409 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 recipes/ion/ion3/201_fix-paths.diff delete mode 100644 recipes/ion/ion3/202_fix-menus.diff delete mode 100644 recipes/ion/ion3/203_fix-kludges.diff delete mode 100644 recipes/ion/ion3/204_fix-bindings.diff delete mode 100644 recipes/ion/ion3/205_ion-lock.diff delete mode 100644 recipes/ion/ion3/206_use-xterm.diff delete mode 100644 recipes/ion/ion3/cross.patch delete mode 100644 recipes/ion/ion3/luaconfig.patch delete mode 100644 recipes/ion/ion3_0.0+ds20041104.bb create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/201_fix-paths.diff create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/202_fix-menus.diff create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/203_fix-kludges.diff create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/204_fix-bindings.diff create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/205_ion-lock.diff create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/206_use-xterm.diff create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/cross.patch create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3/luaconfig.patch create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/ion/ion3_0.0+ds20041104.bb diff --git a/recipes/ion/ion3/201_fix-paths.diff b/recipes/ion/ion3/201_fix-paths.diff deleted file mode 100644 index 014e667..000 --- a/recipes/ion/ion3/201_fix-paths.diff +++ /dev/null @@ -1,93 +0,0 @@ -# -# Patch managed by http://www.holgerschurig.de/patcher.html -# - ion-3ds-20041104/system.mk~201fix-paths -+++ ion-3ds-20041104/system.mk -@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ - ## Installation paths - ## - --PREFIX=/usr/local -+PREFIX=/usr - - # Unless you are creating a package conforming to some OS's standards, you - # probably do not want to modify the following directories: -@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ - # Main binaries - BINDIR=$(PREFIX)/bin - # Configuration .lua files --ETCDIR=$(PREFIX)/etc/ion3 -+ETCDIR=/etc/X11/ion3 - # Some .lua files and ion-* shell scripts - SHAREDIR=$(PREFIX)/share/ion3 - # Manual pages -@@ -27,11 +27,11 @@ - # Nothing at the moment - LIBDIR=$(PREFIX)/lib - # Modules --MODULEDIR=$(LIBDIR)/ion3/mod -+MODULEDIR=$(LIBDIR)/ion3 - # Compiled Lua source code - LCDIR=$(LIBDIR)/ion3/lc - # ion-completefile (does not belong in SHAREDIR being a binary file) --EXTRABINDIR=$(LIBDIR)/ion3/bin -+EXTRABINDIR=$(LIBDIR)/ion3 - # For ion-completeman system-wide cache - VARDIR=/var/cache/ion3 - # Message catalogs -@@ -56,18 +56,18 @@ - - # If you have installed Lua 5.0 from the official tarball without changing - # paths, this should do it. --LUA_DIR=/usr/local --LUA_LIBS = -L$(LUA_DIR)/lib -llua -llualib --LUA_INCLUDES = -I$(LUA_DIR)/include --LUA=$(LUA_DIR)/bin/lua --LUAC=$(LUA_DIR)/bin/luac -+#LUA_DIR=/usr/local -+#LUA_LIBS = -L$(LUA_DIR)/lib -llua -llualib -+#LUA_INCLUDES = -I$(LUA_DIR)/include -+#LUA=$(LUA_DIR)/bin/lua -+#LUAC=$(LUA_DIR)/bin/luac - - # If you are using the Debian packages, the following settings should be - # what you want. --#LUA_LIBS=`lua-config50 --libs` --#LUA_INCLUDES=`lua-config50 --include` --#LUA=lua50 --#LUAC=luac50 -+LUA_LIBS=`lua-config --libs` -+LUA_INCLUDES=`lua-config --include` -+LUA=lua -+LUAC=luac - - - ## -@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ - # asprintf and vasprintf in the c library. (gnu libc has.) - # If HAS_SYSTEM_ASPRINTF is not defined, an implementation - # in sprintf_2.2/ is used. --#HAS_SYSTEM_ASPRINTF=1 -+HAS_SYSTEM_ASPRINTF=1 - - - # If you're on an archaic system (such as relatively recent *BSD releases) -@@ -139,14 +139,14 @@ - - #C89_SOURCE=-ansi - --#POSIX_SOURCE=-D_POSIX_SOURCE -+POSIX_SOURCE=-D_POSIX_SOURCE - - # Most systems --#XOPEN_SOURCE=-D_XOPEN_SOURCE -D_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED -+XOPEN_SOURCE=-D_XOPEN_SOURCE -D_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED - # SunOS, (Irix) -
[oe] [PATCH] lua, lua-gtk2: move to obsolete.
Lua fails to build. There are newer recipes (lua5.1) in tree, only
lua-gtk2 uses this old recipe and nothing uses lua-gtk2.
mipsel-oe-linux-gcc -march=mips32 -o ../../bin/luac
-L/mnt/oe/tmp/sysroots/mipsel-oe-linux/usr/lib
-Wl,-rpath-link,/mnt/oe/tmp/sysroots/mipsel-oe-linux/usr/lib -Wl,-O1 -Wl,-E
luac.o print.o lopcodes.o -L../../lib -llua -llualib -lm -ldl -lreadline
luac.o: In function `strip':
luac.c:(.text+0xa8): undefined reference to `luaM_realloc'
luac.c:(.text+0xc4): undefined reference to `luaM_realloc'
luac.c:(.text+0xdc): undefined reference to `luaM_realloc'
luac.o: In function `main':
luac.c:(.text+0x3f8): undefined reference to `lua_open'
luac.c:(.text+0x438): undefined reference to `lua_tostring'
luac.c:(.text+0x4cc): undefined reference to `luaM_realloc'
luac.c:(.text+0x4f4): undefined reference to `luaM_realloc'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[1]: *** [../../bin/luac] Error 1
Signed-off-by: Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com
---
recipes/lua/lua-gtk2/lua-gtk2-0.3_fixbuild.patch | 352
recipes/lua/lua-gtk2_0.3.bb| 27 --
recipes/lua/lua_5.0.2.bb | 18 -
.../lua/lua-gtk2/lua-gtk2-0.3_fixbuild.patch | 352
recipes/obsolete/lua/lua-gtk2_0.3.bb | 27 ++
recipes/obsolete/lua/lua_5.0.2.bb | 18 +
6 files changed, 397 insertions(+), 397 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 recipes/lua/lua-gtk2/lua-gtk2-0.3_fixbuild.patch
delete mode 100644 recipes/lua/lua-gtk2_0.3.bb
delete mode 100644 recipes/lua/lua_5.0.2.bb
create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/lua/lua-gtk2/lua-gtk2-0.3_fixbuild.patch
create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/lua/lua-gtk2_0.3.bb
create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/lua/lua_5.0.2.bb
diff --git a/recipes/lua/lua-gtk2/lua-gtk2-0.3_fixbuild.patch
b/recipes/lua/lua-gtk2/lua-gtk2-0.3_fixbuild.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 1115b6f..000
--- a/recipes/lua/lua-gtk2/lua-gtk2-0.3_fixbuild.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,352 +0,0 @@
-diff -NbBur lua-gtk2-0.3_orig/configure lua-gtk2-0.3/configure
lua-gtk2-0.3_orig/configure2005-08-16 19:32:07.0 +0200
-+++ lua-gtk2-0.3/configure 2006-05-14 02:52:39.0 +0200
-@@ -2,25 +2,19 @@
-
- # examine system
-
--CFLAGS=$(pkg-config gtk+-2.0 --cflags) $(pkg-config lua50 --cflags) -I
build-linux -I src
-+CFLAGS=-g -Wall -DLINUX -Os -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall $(pkg-config gtk+-2.0
--cflags) $(pkg-config lua50 --cflags) -I build-linux -I src
- VERSION=0.3
--
--if which gcc-4.0 /dev/null; then
-- GCC=gcc-4.0
--elif which gcc /dev/null; then
-- GCC=gcc
--else
-- @echo No GCC found.
-- exit 1
--fi
--
--if true; then
-- CFLAGS2=-DLINUX
-- LIBS= # -lgtk-x11-2.0
--else
-- CFLAGS2=-DWIN32
-- LIBS=
--fi
-+PREFIX=/usr/local
-+GCC=arm-linux-gcc
-+HGCC=gcc
-+
-+#if true; then
-+# CFLAGS2=-DLINUX
-+# LIBS= # -lgtk-x11-2.0
-+#else
-+# CFLAGS2=-DWIN32
-+# LIBS=
-+#fi
-
-
- # build makefile
-@@ -28,13 +22,14 @@
- cat Makefile EOF
- # automatically generated makefile
-
--# CFLAGS :=-DLINUX -Os -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall $CFLAGS
-+#CFLAGS := \-DLINUX -Os -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall $CFLAGS
- # CFLAGS :=-DLINUX -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall $CFLAGS
--CFLAGS:=$CFLAGS2 -g -Wall $CFLAGS
-+CFLAGS=$CFLAGS
- HASH :=hash2
- ODIR :=build-linux/
- VERSION :=$VERSION
- CC:=$GCC
-+HGCC :=$HGCC
-
- all: \${ODIR}libluagtk2.so \${ODIR}main
-
-@@ -46,6 +41,8 @@
- @\${CC} -shared -o \$@ $^ /usr/lib/libffi.a $LIBS
-
- \${ODIR}generate: \${ODIR}generate.o \${ODIR}\${HASH}.o
-+ @echo \$@
-+ @\${HGCC} -Wall -c -g -o \$@ $^
-
- \${ODIR}main.o: src/main.c
- @echo \$@
-@@ -99,9 +96,9 @@
- rm -f \${ODIR}file2c \${ODIR}override.luac \${ODIR}main
-
- install: all
-- mkdir -p ~/.lua50
-- cp gtk2.lua ~/.lua50
-- ln -sf \$(PWD)/build-linux/libluagtk2.so ~/.lua50
-+ install -d \$(DESTDIR)/\$(PREFIX)/lib/lua50
-+ install gtk2.lua \$(DESTDIR)/\$(PREFIX)/lib/lua50
-+ install \$(PWD)/build-linux/libluagtk2.so
\$(DESTDIR)/\$(PREFIX)/lib/lua50
-
- tar:
- (cd ..; ln -s lua-gtk2 lua-gtk2-\${VERSION}; tar czvhf
lua-gtk2-\${VERSION}.tar.gz \\
-diff -NbBur lua-gtk2-0.3_orig/configure_orig lua-gtk2-0.3/configure_orig
lua-gtk2-0.3_orig/configure_orig 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
-+++ lua-gtk2-0.3/configure_orig2006-05-13 18:22:03.0 +0200
-@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
-+#! /bin/sh
-+
-+# examine system
-+
-+CFLAGS=$(pkg-config gtk+-2.0 --cflags) $(pkg-config lua50 --cflags) -I
build-linux -I src
-+VERSION=0.3
-+
-+if which gcc-4.0 /dev/null; then
-+ GCC=gcc-4.0
-+elif which gcc /dev/null; then
-+ GCC=gcc
-+else
-+ @echo No GCC found.
-+ exit 1
-+fi
-+
-+if true; then
-+ CFLAGS2=-DLINUX
-+ LIBS= # -lgtk-x11-2.0
-+else
-+ CFLAGS2=-DWIN32
-+ LIBS=
-+fi
-+
-+
-+# build makefile
-+
-+cat
[oe] [PATCH] dsniff_2.3.bb: fix buildability.
This almost 10 year old software is beginning to suffer bitrot. Libnids now
uses glib, and openssl structs have moved headers.
Signed-off-by: Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com
---
recipes/dsniff/dsniff-2.3/openssl-includes.patch | 11 +++
recipes/dsniff/dsniff_2.3.bb |7 ---
2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 recipes/dsniff/dsniff-2.3/openssl-includes.patch
diff --git a/recipes/dsniff/dsniff-2.3/openssl-includes.patch
b/recipes/dsniff/dsniff-2.3/openssl-includes.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000..033fc5c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes/dsniff/dsniff-2.3/openssl-includes.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+--- dsniff-2.3/sshcrypto.c.orig2010-10-11 16:38:25.0 +1030
dsniff-2.3/sshcrypto.c 2010-10-11 16:38:30.0 +1030
+@@ -14,6 +14,8 @@
+
+ #include sys/types.h
+ #include openssl/ssl.h
++#include openssl/blowfish.h
++#include openssl/des.h
+
+ #include err.h
+ #include stdio.h
diff --git a/recipes/dsniff/dsniff_2.3.bb b/recipes/dsniff/dsniff_2.3.bb
index 03ef527..51f2113 100644
--- a/recipes/dsniff/dsniff_2.3.bb
+++ b/recipes/dsniff/dsniff_2.3.bb
@@ -3,16 +3,17 @@ SECTION = console/network
HOMEPAGE = http://www.monkey.org/~dugsong/dsniff/;
AUTHOR = Dug Song dugs...@monkey.org
LICENSE = BSD
-PR = r2
+PR = r3
# There is a significant API change beween 1.0.2a of libnet and
# 1.1.x, dsniff will only work with the older and there is no
# updated version of dnsniff.
-DEPENDS = virtual/db libpcap libnet-1.0 libnids openssl
+DEPENDS = virtual/db libpcap libnet-1.0 libnids openssl glib-2.0
SRC_URI = \
http://www.monkey.org/~dugsong/dsniff/dsniff-${PV}.tar.gz \
file://configure.patch \
+ file://openssl-includes.patch \
inherit autotools
@@ -27,7 +28,7 @@ EXTRA_OECONF = \
EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'install_prefix=${D}'
CFLAGS =+ -I${S}/missing
-LDFLAGS += -lresolv
+LDFLAGS += -lresolv -lglib-2.0 -lgthread-2.0 -lrt -pthread
SRC_URI[md5sum] = 183e336a45e38013f3af840bddec44b4
SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
82e492455486e655c315f027d393dbeb49ad930804acccdc51b30d57e1294ff5
--
1.7.1
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCH] galago: move to obsolete.
libgalago doesn't build, and presumably hasn't since dbus 0.92 was in the tree.
| ../libgalago/.libs/libgalago.so: undefined reference to
`dbus_connection_disconnect'
| collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
| make[2]: *** [presence-feed] Error 1
Signed-off-by: Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com
---
recipes/galago/eds-feed/disable-bonobo.patch | 62
recipes/galago/eds-feed_0.3.2.bb | 17 -
recipes/galago/files/no-check.patch| 15 -
recipes/galago/galago-daemon_0.3.4.bb | 17 -
recipes/galago/libgalago_0.3.3.bb | 20 --
.../obsolete/galago/eds-feed/disable-bonobo.patch | 62
recipes/obsolete/galago/eds-feed_0.3.2.bb | 17 +
recipes/obsolete/galago/files/no-check.patch | 15 +
recipes/obsolete/galago/galago-daemon_0.3.4.bb | 17 +
recipes/obsolete/galago/libgalago_0.3.3.bb | 20 ++
10 files changed, 131 insertions(+), 131 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 recipes/galago/eds-feed/disable-bonobo.patch
delete mode 100644 recipes/galago/eds-feed_0.3.2.bb
delete mode 100644 recipes/galago/files/no-check.patch
delete mode 100644 recipes/galago/galago-daemon_0.3.4.bb
delete mode 100644 recipes/galago/libgalago_0.3.3.bb
create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/galago/eds-feed/disable-bonobo.patch
create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/galago/eds-feed_0.3.2.bb
create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/galago/files/no-check.patch
create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/galago/galago-daemon_0.3.4.bb
create mode 100644 recipes/obsolete/galago/libgalago_0.3.3.bb
diff --git a/recipes/galago/eds-feed/disable-bonobo.patch
b/recipes/galago/eds-feed/disable-bonobo.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 3a20978..000
--- a/recipes/galago/eds-feed/disable-bonobo.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,62 +0,0 @@
-Index: eds-feed-0.3.2/configure.ac
-===
eds-feed-0.3.2.orig/configure.ac 2005-08-28 19:11:39.0 +
-+++ eds-feed-0.3.2/configure.ac2005-12-16 09:22:10.0 +
-@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@
- libxml-2.0)
-
- # Check which version of eds we're using
--PKG_CHECK_MODULES(EDS, libebook-1.2 = 1.1.4 libedata-book-1.2 = 1.1.4)
-+PKG_CHECK_MODULES(EDS, libebook-1.2 = 1.1.4)
-
- PACKAGE_CFLAGS=$PACKAGE_CFLAGS $EDS_CFLAGS
- PACKAGE_LIBS=$PACKAGE_LIBS $EDS_LIBS
-Index: eds-feed-0.3.2/src/main.c
-===
eds-feed-0.3.2.orig/src/main.c 2005-08-21 07:26:02.0 +
-+++ eds-feed-0.3.2/src/main.c 2005-12-16 09:24:38.0 +
-@@ -20,17 +20,11 @@
- */
- #include glib.h
- #include libgalago/galago.h
--#include libedata-book/Evolution-DataServer-Addressbook.h
-
- #include libebook/e-book.h
--#include libedata-book/e-data-book-factory.h
--#include bonobo/bonobo-main.h
-
- #include string.h
-
--#define E_DATA_BOOK_FACTORY_OAF_ID \
--OAFIID:GNOME_Evolution_DataServer_BookFactory
--
- static EBookView *book_view = NULL;
- static EBook *book = NULL;
- static gulong book_view_tag = 0;
-@@ -157,8 +151,8 @@
- galago_person_set_photo(person, NULL);
- else
- {
-- galago_photo_new(person, (unsigned char *)ephoto-data,
-- ephoto-length);
-+//galago_photo_new(person, (unsigned char *)ephoto-data,
-+// ephoto-length);
- }
- }
-
-@@ -294,15 +288,6 @@
-
- galago_core_set_exit_with_daemon(TRUE);
-
-- if (!bonobo_init_full(NULL, NULL, bonobo_activation_orb_get(),
--CORBA_OBJECT_NIL,
CORBA_OBJECT_NIL))
-- {
-- fprintf(stderr, Unable to initialize bonobo.\n);
-- exit(1);
-- }
--
-- bonobo_activate();
--
- setup_book_view();
- setup_services();
-
diff --git a/recipes/galago/eds-feed_0.3.2.bb b/recipes/galago/eds-feed_0.3.2.bb
deleted file mode 100644
index e42f6e8..000
--- a/recipes/galago/eds-feed_0.3.2.bb
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-DESCRIPTION = Galago linkage to the Evolution Data Server.
-HOMEPAGE = http://www.galago-project.org/;
-LICENSE = GPL
-DEPENDS = gettext libgalago dbus glib-2.0 eds-dbus
-
-SRC_URI =
http://www.galago-project.org/files/releases/source/${PN}/${P}.tar.gz \
- file://disable-bonobo.patch
-# file://no-check.patch
-#EXTRA_OECONF =--disable-binreloc
-
-FILES_${PN} += ${libdir}/galago/eds-feed
-
-inherit autotools pkgconfig
-
-
-SRC_URI[md5sum] = 1f6ac4910dc8bb0276549bd0308f8acb
-SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
6b7448359284f5af75cbb7027c47616b28aca8b90f9a16b9ec954fa50e455ed3
diff --git a/recipes/galago/files/no-check.patch
b/recipes/galago/files/no-check.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 89b0eaf..000
--- a/recipes/galago/files/no-check.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,15 +0,0 @@
Re: [oe] Building for multiple machines
2010/10/11 Elvis Dowson elvis.dow...@mac.com: Hi, What should I do build for multiple machines ? I have an overo-oe repository, but I need to temporarily build u-boot for a different board. In my auto.conf, the entry is MACHINE=overo u-boot board definitions for say beagleboard, have named the board beagle So, would an appropriate command be bitbake u-boot-omap3 MACHINE=beagle Elvis Dowson I guess trying this would ahve been much faster than waiting for an answer here. And OE does not have an auto.conf Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] lua, lua-gtk2: move to obsolete.
2010/10/11 Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com: Lua fails to build. There are newer recipes (lua5.1) in tree, only lua-gtk2 uses this old recipe and nothing uses lua-gtk2. Acked-by: Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] prboom_2.5.0.bb: fix compilation failure due to undefined references.
2010/10/11 Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com:
Need to #define _GNU_SOURCE for sched.h to define CPU_ZERO/CPU_SET.
SDL/libsdldoom.a(i_system.o): In function `I_SetAffinityMask':
| i_system.c:(.text+0x7d4): undefined reference to `CPU_ZERO'
| i_system.c:(.text+0x7e8): undefined reference to `CPU_SET'
| collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
Signed-off-by: Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com
---
.../prboom-2.5.0/gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch | 12
recipes/prboom/prboom_2.5.0.bb | 3 ++-
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 recipes/prboom/prboom-2.5.0/gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch
diff --git a/recipes/prboom/prboom-2.5.0/gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch
b/recipes/prboom/prboom-2.5.0/gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000..e77917a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes/prboom/prboom-2.5.0/gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+Upstream:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=4CB2549C.2030100%40gmail.comforum_name=prboom-devel
+
+--- prboom-2.5.0/src/SDL/i_system.c.orig 2010-10-11 09:58:02.0
+1030
prboom-2.5.0/src/SDL/i_system.c 2010-10-11 09:59:16.0 +1030
+@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
+
*-
+ */
+
++#define _GNU_SOURCE
+ #include stdio.h
+
+ #include stdarg.h
diff --git a/recipes/prboom/prboom_2.5.0.bb b/recipes/prboom/prboom_2.5.0.bb
index 92a276d..13f3623 100644
--- a/recipes/prboom/prboom_2.5.0.bb
+++ b/recipes/prboom/prboom_2.5.0.bb
@@ -4,10 +4,11 @@ PRIORITY = optional
DEPENDS = virtual/libsdl libsdl-mixer libsdl-net
LICENSE = GPL
-PR = r2
+PR = r3
RRECOMMENDS_${PN} = freedoom
SRC_URI = ${SOURCEFORGE_MIRROR}/prboom/prboom-${PV}.tar.gz \
+ file://gnu_source_for_sched_h.patch \
inherit autotools
--
1.7.1
Do you feel this is the preferred way?
I would probably not have made the patch but add -D_GNU_SOURCE to
CFLAGS. (I like to compile all the sources with the same flags to
avoid inconsistencies)
Frans
Frans
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] ion: move to obsolete.
2010/10/11 Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com: This recipe has been marked BROKEN for 5 years or so. Signed-off-by: Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com Acked-by: Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] galago: move to obsolete.
2010/10/11 Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com: libgalago doesn't build, and presumably hasn't since dbus 0.92 was in the tree. Acked-by: Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] lua, lua-gtk2: move to obsolete.
Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com [2010-10-11 16:54:34]: Lua fails to build. There are newer recipes (lua5.1) in tree, only lua-gtk2 uses this old recipe and nothing uses lua-gtk2. I can't give you the ACK, but I totaly agree. Was thinking about the same like week ago, but forget to send a patch :-) -- ynezz ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] testing branch 2010-10-08
do_configure still fails for epiphany-2.30.2-r3 (see http://tinderbox.openembedded.net/packages/835265/) with: checking location of system Certificate Authority list... configure: error: could not find. Use --with-ca-file=path to set, or --without-ca-file to disable I thought the additional ca-certifactes dependency (see thread http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/37453/focus=37585) fixes this, but it does not seem so. :( I'd a look into my openSUSE-system and there epiphany uses a file /var/lib/ca-certificates/ca-bundle.pem (linked to /etc/ssl/ca-bundle.pem) installed by the ca-certificates package. The OE ca-certificates package does not install such a bundle. So may be that's the real problem. Steffen ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] openjade-native build fails
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11-10-10 05:40, Steve Sakoman wrote: After commit fdf02c61607acb5046afaa11c5c682ab99f4d508 openjade-native is failing on a clean build: http://build.sakoman.com/public/logs/task/114486.txt Any ideas on how to fix this? I've reverted the commit on my local tree so I can keep working, but I'm sure others will run into this too. I get the same error when trying to build openjade-native. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFMssCtMkyGM64RGpERAjgQAKCKzZyHp4z/ho1t0pZxYG/e4jmVzQCgvEPi AoS1TGyMGDFy4GnMBh/dP+g= =Ld6s -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] Building for multiple machines
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11-10-10 08:27, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: 2010/10/11 Elvis Dowson elvis.dow...@mac.com: Hi, What should I do build for multiple machines ? I have an overo-oe repository, but I need to temporarily build u-boot for a different board. In my auto.conf, the entry is MACHINE=overo u-boot board definitions for say beagleboard, have named the board beagle So, would an appropriate command be bitbake u-boot-omap3 MACHINE=beagle Elvis Dowson I guess trying this would ahve been much faster than waiting for an answer here. And OE does not have an auto.conf OE *does* have an auto.conf, pretty much since the start: k...@dominion:/OE/org.openembedded.dev/conf$ git blame bitbake.conf | grep auto.conf 00f6a165 (Chris Larson 2004-12-09 01:08:40 + 695) include conf/auto.conf -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFMssEUMkyGM64RGpERAqxMAJ9ORcv5iii/70qi6c7EC7ReXlKSQgCgm4UF qgXeKzlpaIRCTrylt4wM+hU= =eNId -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCHv3 2/3] kernel bbclass: make 'kernel-modules' meta-package use RRECOMMENDS to please insane.bbclass
Signed-off-by: Koen Kooi k...@openembedded.org
---
classes/kernel.bbclass |8
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/classes/kernel.bbclass b/classes/kernel.bbclass
index 83e3f44..7039d27 100644
--- a/classes/kernel.bbclass
+++ b/classes/kernel.bbclass
@@ -489,12 +489,12 @@ python populate_packages_prepend () {
for i in l:
pkg = module_pattern %
legitimize_package_name(re.match(module_regex, os.path.basename(i)).group(1))
blacklist.append(pkg)
- metapkg_rdepends = []
+ metapkg_rrecommends = []
packages = bb.data.getVar('PACKAGES', d, 1).split()
for pkg in packages[1:]:
- if not pkg in blacklist and not pkg in metapkg_rdepends and not
any(pkg.endswith(post) for post in depchains):
- metapkg_rdepends.append(pkg)
- bb.data.setVar('RDEPENDS_' + metapkg, ' '.join(metapkg_rdepends), d)
+ if not pkg in blacklist and not pkg in metapkg_rrecommends and
not any(pkg.endswith(post) for post in depchains):
+ metapkg_rrecommends.append(pkg)
+ bb.data.setVar('RRECOMMENDS_' + metapkg, ' '.join(metapkg_rrecommends),
d)
bb.data.setVar('DESCRIPTION_' + metapkg, 'Kernel modules meta package',
d)
packages.append(metapkg)
bb.data.setVar('PACKAGES', ' '.join(packages), d)
--
1.6.6.1
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCHv3 3/3] multi-kernel: adapt to kernel_do_compile_kernelmodules change in kernel.bbclass
---
recipes/linux/multi-kernel.inc |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/linux/multi-kernel.inc b/recipes/linux/multi-kernel.inc
index 70cfd87..0523a33 100644
--- a/recipes/linux/multi-kernel.inc
+++ b/recipes/linux/multi-kernel.inc
@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ do_compileconfigs () {
# Build and Install this alternative kernel
do_configure
kernel_do_compile
+do_compile_kernelmodules
kernel_do_install
# Drop the resulting images in the deploy dir
--
1.6.6.1
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] cpio: update 2.5 to 2.11
Am Sonntag, den 10.10.2010, 22:42 -0700 schrieb Scott Garman: Signed-off-by: Scott Garman sgar...@zenlinux.com I build tested your patch for minimal-eglibc for `MACHINE = beagleboard`. --- recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch | 15 recipes/cpio/cpio_2.11.bb| 42 +++ recipes/cpio/cpio_2.5.bb | 42 --- recipes/cpio/files/install.patch | 61 -- 4 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 103 deletions(-) create mode 100644 recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch create mode 100644 recipes/cpio/cpio_2.11.bb delete mode 100644 recipes/cpio/cpio_2.5.bb delete mode 100644 recipes/cpio/files/install.patch diff --git a/recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch b/recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch new file mode 100644 index 000..059976c --- /dev/null +++ b/recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ +# Avoid multiple stat definitions +# Patch taken from cpio mailing list posting 2010-03-19 +# +# Signed-off-by: Scott Garman sgar...@zenlinux.com Please include the link to that message in the archive. […] Thanks, Paul signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] OT: git format-patch -M (was: [PATCH] cpio: update 2.5 to 2.11)
Am Sonntag, den 10.10.2010, 22:54 -0700 schrieb Scott Garman: On 10/10/2010 10:42 PM, Scott Garman wrote: Signed-off-by: Scott Garmansgar...@zenlinux.com --- recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch | 15 recipes/cpio/cpio_2.11.bb| 42 +++ recipes/cpio/cpio_2.5.bb | 42 --- recipes/cpio/files/install.patch | 61 -- 4 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 103 deletions(-) create mode 100644 recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch create mode 100644 recipes/cpio/cpio_2.11.bb delete mode 100644 recipes/cpio/cpio_2.5.bb delete mode 100644 recipes/cpio/files/install.patch I'd like to point out that I used git mv to rename cpio_2.5.bb to cpio_2.11.bb, but git format-patch refuses to show the rename. I tried passing it the -M flag and also setting diff.renames to true in my .gitconfig file. So I'm not sure what's causing the problem. Well my guess is, that it is due to the changed checksums, so that it is not only a rename. Thanks, Paul signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] Building for multiple machines
On Oct 11, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Koen Kooi wrote: I guess trying this would ahve been much faster than waiting for an answer here. And OE does not have an auto.conf OE *does* have an auto.conf, pretty much since the start: There was a reason why I didn't try it right away. A while back, i had a working overo-oe, and auto.conf was set to MACHINE=overo After that, I changed it to MACHINE=beagleboard. It created two output folders in tmp/deply for both the targets, but the images didn't work properly, I had some issues. Can't recall exactly what it was. So, I had to delete my tmp folder, and repeat the build process afresh, this time, with only MACHINE='beagleboard. I was wondering what the recommended process is for building for multiple machine architectures? Elvis Dowson ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] zsafe
Dnia piątek, 8 października 2010 o 22:54:20 Frans Meulenbroeks napisał(a):
By incident bumped into zsafe. No idea what it is, but something in
the recipe drew my attention:
FILES_zsafe = zsafe
do_install() {
install -d ${D}${palmtopdir}/pics/${APPNAME}/
install -m 0644 ${WORKDIR}/pics/${APPNAME}/*.xpm
${D}${palmtopdir}/pics/${APPNAME}/
install -m 0644 ${WORKDIR}/zsafe.png ${D}${palmtopdir}/pics/
}
Seems kinda weird, installing files like zsafe.png and *.xpm but not
add them to the package
maybe inherit opie (which is also in the recipe will do some things
with this under water, but I would expect these files to go with the
exe.
Those files go into package. opie.bbclass uses APPNAME/APPTYPE/APPDESKTOP
variables to check what kind of application it is and how it is supposed to be
run, then it takes care of copying icon and desktop file and few other things.
It was written years ago and I think that most of today OE developers never
played with OPIE.
Dropping that FILES_zsafe = zsafe line may be safe - but I would suggest
doing build to check it.
Regards,
--
JID: h...@jabber.org
Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] prboom_2.5.0.bb: fix compilation failure due to undefined references.
On 11 October 2010 17:04, Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com wrote: Do you feel this is the preferred way? I would probably not have made the patch but add -D_GNU_SOURCE to CFLAGS. (I like to compile all the sources with the same flags to avoid inconsistencies) Frans To be honest, I didn't really think about it and don't care either way. But the glibc manual says the following: You should define these macros by using ‘#define’ preprocessor directives at the top of your source code files. These directives must come before any #include of a system header file. It is best to make them the very first thing in the file, preceded only by comments. You could also use the ‘-D’ option to GCC, but it's better if you make the source files indicate their own meaning in a self-contained way. [1] The last sentence is not found in the feature_test_macros(7) man page. -Graham [1] http://www.gnu.org/s/libc/manual/html_node/Feature-Test-Macros.html ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] angstrom.inc: set TARGET_VENDOR ?= -angstrom
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 08:07:11PM +0200, Víctor Manuel Jáquez Leal wrote: By doing this we could use external toolchains for build angstrom based images. Ping. Any comment about this patch? vmjl ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] angstrom.inc: set TARGET_VENDOR ?= -angstrom
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11-10-10 11:33, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote: On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 08:07:11PM +0200, Víctor Manuel Jáquez Leal wrote: By doing this we could use external toolchains for build angstrom based images. Ping. Any comment about this patch? Something like this should be done in external-toolchain.inc -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFMsubwMkyGM64RGpERAltkAKCzoLak6SGJ13n0N+wPuPo8dKAthQCfTzOM Jse5t4NNC6RdqDcyjOFfUbg= =bDqB -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] angstrom.inc: set TARGET_VENDOR ?= -angstrom
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 12:29:04PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11-10-10 11:33, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote: On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 08:07:11PM +0200, Víctor Manuel Jáquez Leal wrote: By doing this we could use external toolchains for build angstrom based images. Ping. Any comment about this patch? Something like this should be done in external-toolchain.inc There's no external-toolchain.inc in OE's org.openembedded.dev branch. So I assume that you refer to a user's local.conf require. I done that and it doesn't work: the distro/include/angstrom.inc evaluation happens later and overrides the TARGET_VENDOR variable, that why a ?= is needed. vmjl ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCH] openjade: return oj-native-libosp-fix.patch, lost in BBCLASSEXTEND change fdf02c61607acb5046afaa11c5c682ab99f4d508
---
recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb |5 +++--
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
b/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
index 238586b..9462636 100644
--- a/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
+++ b/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
@@ -5,9 +5,10 @@ DESCRIPTION = OpenJade is a suite of tools for validating, \
processing, and applying DSSSL (Document Style Semantics and \
Specification Language) stylesheets to SGML and XML documents.
LICENSE = BSD
-PR = r2
+PR = r3
SRC_URI = ${SOURCEFORGE_MIRROR}/openjade/openjade-${PV}.tar.gz \
- file://configure.patch \
+ file://oj-native-libosp-fix.patch \
+ file://configure.patch \
inherit autotools
--
1.7.3.1
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] gtk+-native: depends somehow on cups-native: `ERROR: Required build target 'gtk+-native' has no buildable providers.`
Dear OE folks, $ bitbake evince fails with the following error for `angstrom-2010.x` for `MACHINE = beagleboard`. ERROR: Required build target 'evince' has no buildable providers. Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['evince', 'gnome-keyring', 'gtk+-native', 'cups-native'] Command execution failed: Traceback (most recent call last): File /home/paul/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py, line 88, in runAsyncCommand commandmethod(self.cmds_async, self, options) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py, line 174, in buildTargets command.cooker.buildTargets(pkgs_to_build, task) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/cooker.py, line 784, in buildTargets taskdata.add_unresolved(localdata, self.status) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 556, in add_unresolved self.remove_buildtarget(targetid) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 510, in remove_buildtarget self.fail_fnid(fnid, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 490, in fail_fnid self.remove_buildtarget(target, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 510, in remove_buildtarget self.fail_fnid(fnid, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 490, in fail_fnid self.remove_buildtarget(target, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 510, in remove_buildtarget self.fail_fnid(fnid, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 490, in fail_fnid self.remove_buildtarget(target, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 519, in remove_buildtarget raise bb.providers.NoProvider NoProvider `gtk+.inc` `DEPENDS` on `cups` [1]. Is this converted to `cups-native` for `gtk+-native`? Thanks, Paul [1] http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tree/recipes/gtk+/gtk+.inc signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] Building for multiple machines
2010/10/11 Elvis Dowson elvis.dow...@mac.com:
On Oct 11, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
I guess trying this would ahve been much faster than waiting for an answer
here.
And OE does not have an auto.conf
OE *does* have an auto.conf, pretty much since the start:
There was a reason why I didn't try it right away. A while back, i had a
working overo-oe, and auto.conf was set to MACHINE=overo
After that, I changed it to MACHINE=beagleboard.
It created two output folders in tmp/deply for both the targets, but the
images didn't work properly, I had some issues. Can't recall exactly what it
was. So, I had to delete my tmp folder, and repeat the build process afresh,
this time, with only MACHINE='beagleboard.
I was wondering what the recommended process is for building for multiple
machine architectures?
Elvis Dowson
I've build multiple machines in one tmp but often they are for
different architectures (e.g. hawkboard and beagleboard (whcih is
armv5 and armv7a resp)
If you are going to mix distro's things might become more troublesome
(and machine specific pinnings (with DEFAULT_PREFERENCE) might also
cause mismatches).
Of course you can also change your TMPDIR (and set it e.g. to
tmp_${DISTRO}_${MACHINE})
That way you'll get different tmp dirs (probably you want to inherit
rm_work to keep the space usage manageable).
Have fun! Frans
Frans
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] prboom_2.5.0.bb: fix compilation failure due to undefined references.
2010/10/11 Graham Gower graham.go...@gmail.com: On 11 October 2010 17:04, Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com wrote: Do you feel this is the preferred way? I would probably not have made the patch but add -D_GNU_SOURCE to CFLAGS. (I like to compile all the sources with the same flags to avoid inconsistencies) Frans To be honest, I didn't really think about it and don't care either way. But the glibc manual says the following: You should define these macros by using ‘#define’ preprocessor directives at the top of your source code files. These directives must come before any #include of a system header file. It is best to make them the very first thing in the file, preceded only by comments. You could also use the ‘-D’ option to GCC, but it's better if you make the source files indicate their own meaning in a self-contained way. [1] The last sentence is not found in the feature_test_macros(7) man page. -Graham [1] http://www.gnu.org/s/libc/manual/html_node/Feature-Test-Macros.html Ah ok, didn't know that text. My personal perception is to keep changes as small and unintrusive as possible. That is why I generally prefer -D. With a new version the -D will keep working whereas a patch might not (due to a change in the src file). But looking at that text, I'm fine with this change. Acked-by: Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] angstrom.inc: set TARGET_VENDOR ?= -angstrom
2010/10/11 Víctor M. Jáquez L. vjaq...@igalia.com: On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 12:29:04PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11-10-10 11:33, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote: On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 08:07:11PM +0200, Víctor Manuel Jáquez Leal wrote: By doing this we could use external toolchains for build angstrom based images. Ping. Any comment about this patch? Something like this should be done in external-toolchain.inc There's no external-toolchain.inc in OE's org.openembedded.dev branch. So I assume that you refer to a user's local.conf require. I done that and it doesn't work: the distro/include/angstrom.inc evaluation happens later and overrides the TARGET_VENDOR variable, that why a ?= is needed. vmjl It is toolchain-external.inc, not external-toolchain.inc /home/frans/workspace/openembedded.git/conf/distro/include/toolchain-external.inc Enjoy! Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [solved] gtk+-native: depends somehow on cups-native: `ERROR: Required build target 'gtk+-native' has no buildable providers.`
Am Montag, den 11.10.2010, 13:20 +0200 schrieb Paul Menzel: $ bitbake evince fails with the following error for `angstrom-2010.x` for `MACHINE = beagleboard`. ERROR: Required build target 'evince' has no buildable providers. Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['evince', 'gnome-keyring', 'gtk+-native', 'cups-native'] Command execution failed: Traceback (most recent call last): File /home/paul/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py, line 88, in runAsyncCommand commandmethod(self.cmds_async, self, options) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py, line 174, in buildTargets command.cooker.buildTargets(pkgs_to_build, task) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/cooker.py, line 784, in buildTargets taskdata.add_unresolved(localdata, self.status) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 556, in add_unresolved self.remove_buildtarget(targetid) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 510, in remove_buildtarget self.fail_fnid(fnid, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 490, in fail_fnid self.remove_buildtarget(target, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 510, in remove_buildtarget self.fail_fnid(fnid, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 490, in fail_fnid self.remove_buildtarget(target, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 510, in remove_buildtarget self.fail_fnid(fnid, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 490, in fail_fnid self.remove_buildtarget(target, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 519, in remove_buildtarget raise bb.providers.NoProvider NoProvider `gtk+.inc` `DEPENDS` on `cups` [1]. Is this converted to `cups-native` for `gtk+-native`? Sorry, due to the recent discussions on the list I had the following local change in `gtk+_2.20.1.bb`. s/DEPENDS_virtclass-native/DEPENDS_append_virtclass-native/ I guess that did not work so well and reverting it makes the error go away. Thanks, Paul [1] http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tree/recipes/gtk+/gtk+.inc signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] gtk+-native: depends somehow on cups-native: `ERROR: Required build target 'gtk+-native' has no buildable providers.`
2010/10/11 Paul Menzel paulepan...@users.sourceforge.net: Dear OE folks, $ bitbake evince fails with the following error for `angstrom-2010.x` for `MACHINE = beagleboard`. ERROR: Required build target 'evince' has no buildable providers. Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['evince', 'gnome-keyring', 'gtk+-native', 'cups-native'] Command execution failed: Traceback (most recent call last): File /home/paul/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py, line 88, in runAsyncCommand commandmethod(self.cmds_async, self, options) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py, line 174, in buildTargets command.cooker.buildTargets(pkgs_to_build, task) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/cooker.py, line 784, in buildTargets taskdata.add_unresolved(localdata, self.status) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 556, in add_unresolved self.remove_buildtarget(targetid) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 510, in remove_buildtarget self.fail_fnid(fnid, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 490, in fail_fnid self.remove_buildtarget(target, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 510, in remove_buildtarget self.fail_fnid(fnid, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 490, in fail_fnid self.remove_buildtarget(target, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 510, in remove_buildtarget self.fail_fnid(fnid, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 490, in fail_fnid self.remove_buildtarget(target, missing_list) File /oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 519, in remove_buildtarget raise bb.providers.NoProvider NoProvider `gtk+.inc` `DEPENDS` on `cups` [1]. Is this converted to `cups-native` for `gtk+-native`? Yes. see native.bbclass, around line 118: for dep in deps: if dep.endswith(-cross): newdeps.append(dep.replace(-cross, -native)) elif not dep.endswith(-native): newdeps.append(dep + -native) else: newdeps.append(dep) Thanks, Paul [1] http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tree/recipes/gtk+/gtk+.inc ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] git SRCREV
Roughly once a week i see a question on irc about someone getting a git error: fatal: not a valid object name 1 this is because SRCREV is not defined for e.g. that machine. What about extending bitbake (guess it is in there) with an error message that more clearly explains the problem? Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] zsafe
2010/10/11 Marcin Juszkiewicz mar...@juszkiewicz.com.pl:
Dnia piątek, 8 października 2010 o 22:54:20 Frans Meulenbroeks napisał(a):
By incident bumped into zsafe. No idea what it is, but something in
the recipe drew my attention:
FILES_zsafe = zsafe
do_install() {
install -d ${D}${palmtopdir}/pics/${APPNAME}/
install -m 0644 ${WORKDIR}/pics/${APPNAME}/*.xpm
${D}${palmtopdir}/pics/${APPNAME}/
install -m 0644 ${WORKDIR}/zsafe.png ${D}${palmtopdir}/pics/
}
Seems kinda weird, installing files like zsafe.png and *.xpm but not
add them to the package
maybe inherit opie (which is also in the recipe will do some things
with this under water, but I would expect these files to go with the
exe.
Those files go into package. opie.bbclass uses APPNAME/APPTYPE/APPDESKTOP
variables to check what kind of application it is and how it is supposed to be
run, then it takes care of copying icon and desktop file and few other things.
It was written years ago and I think that most of today OE developers never
played with OPIE.
Dropping that FILES_zsafe = zsafe line may be safe - but I would suggest
doing build to check it.
As someone who never played with opie, I'll leave it to an expert.
Frans
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] git SRCREV
On 11/10/2010 12:45, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: Roughly once a week i see a question on irc about someone getting a git error: fatal: not a valid object name 1 this is because SRCREV is not defined for e.g. that machine. What about extending bitbake (guess it is in there) with an error message that more clearly explains the problem? As 1 can never be valid for git, how about a if SRCREV==1 then exlode in git.bbclass Graeme ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] git SRCREV
On 11/10/2010 12:47, Graeme Gregory wrote: On 11/10/2010 12:45, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: Roughly once a week i see a question on irc about someone getting a git error: fatal: not a valid object name 1 this is because SRCREV is not defined for e.g. that machine. What about extending bitbake (guess it is in there) with an error message that more clearly explains the problem? As 1 can never be valid for git, how about a if SRCREV==1 then exlode in git.bbclass Of course I meant the git class in the fetcher in bitbake :-) G ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [RFC] unpackaged files
Dear all, Currently one gets a NOTE if a file is installed but not packaged. However in larger builds this often gets lost. Then again a file installed but not packaged is probably an error. To make things easier trappable and resolvable, I would propose the following: - an option (in due time to be made mandatory) to turn the NOTE into an error - a way to indicate that a file is installed but purposedly not packaged (e.g. I have such a thing in mythtv with a README file) This could be by creating a pseudo-package (like -unused or -ignore) which can be used to add files that are explicitly not packaged How do people feel about this? (and, if desired, is there someone who can implement this, guess this is outside my python skills). Best regards, Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] git SRCREV
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 12:49:03PM +0100, Graeme Gregory wrote:
On 11/10/2010 12:47, Graeme Gregory wrote:
On 11/10/2010 12:45, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
Roughly once a week i see a question on irc about someone getting a
git error: fatal: not a valid object name 1
this is because SRCREV is not defined for e.g. that machine.
What about extending bitbake (guess it is in there) with an error
message that more clearly explains the problem?
As 1 can never be valid for git, how about a if SRCREV==1 then exlode in
git.bbclass
Of course I meant the git class in the fetcher in bitbake :-)
if you want it to explode then you can use:
diff --git a/conf/bitbake.conf b/conf/bitbake.conf
index c1a65e2c..f7a876d 100644
--- a/conf/bitbake.conf
+++ b/conf/bitbake.conf
@@ -579,7 +579,7 @@ UPDATECOMMAND = ERROR, this must be a BitBake bug
UPDATECOMMAND_cvs = /usr/bin/env 'PATH=${PATH}' cvs -d${CVSROOT} update -d -P
${CVSCOOPTS}
UPDATECOMMAND_svn = /usr/bin/env svn update --non-interactive
--trust-server-cert --force --accept theirs-full ${SVNCOOPTS}
SRCDATE = ${DATE}
-SRCREV = 1
+SRCREV = INVALID
SRCPV = $...@bb.fetch.get_srcrev(d)}
AUTOREV = ${SRCPV}
problem is that you'll get lots of
NOTE: Handling BitBake files: / (6820/7151) [95 %]ERROR: Please set SRCREV to a
valid value while parsing /OE/dev/recipes/pimlico/contacts_svn.bb
NOTE: class 'bb.fetch.InvalidSRCREV':Please set SRCREV to a valid value while
evaluating:
$...@bb.fetch.get_srcrev(d)}
NOTE: class 'bb.fetch.InvalidSRCREV':Please set SRCREV to a valid value while
evaluating:
0.8+svnr${SRCPV}
NOTE: class 'bb.fetch.InvalidSRCREV':Please set SRCREV to a valid value while
evaluating:
${PN}-${EXTENDPE}${PV}-${PR}
NOTE: class 'bb.fetch.InvalidSRCREV':Please set SRCREV to a valid value while
evaluating:
${PF}:${P}:${PN}:${BP}:${BPN}:files:.
ERROR: Please set SRCREV to a valid value while parsing
/OE/dev/recipes/pimlico/contacts_svn.bb
even for recipes not in your target RDEPENDS..
regards,
--
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: martin.ja...@gmail.com
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [RFC] unpackaged files
В сообщении от Понедельник 11 октября 2010 15:51:05 автор Frans Meulenbroeks написал: - a way to indicate that a file is installed but purposedly not packaged (e.g. I have such a thing in mythtv with a README file) This could be by creating a pseudo-package (like -unused or -ignore) which can be used to add files that are explicitly not packaged Shouldn't such files be removed with do_install_append()? ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] General Assembly 2010 Agenda
I have just created a page on OE wiki to hold the Agenda for 2010 General Assembly. http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/GA2010 I would love to hear from members of any addition discussions that should occur. Or better ordering suggestions. Graeme ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] Membership in the OpenEmbedded eV
As most of you know, there is an OpenEmbedded eV to provide an umbrella organization for handling various aspects of managing the project. There is a description here: http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Organization. We are holding the annual General Assembly on Friday October 30, 2010 after ELCE in Cambridge. The actual GA should be first thing in the morning and shouldn't take more than a couple of hours. One of the things we would like to do is vote in new members to the eV (for the .us guys, think 501c3). If you are interested in becoming a member, read the Organization web page and send me an email indicating your desire to become a member. Please include a short paragraph explaining who you are and how you are involved with OpenEmbedded. Philip ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [RFC] unpackaged files
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Roman I Khimov khi...@altell.ru wrote: В сообщении от Понедельник 11 октября 2010 15:51:05 автор Frans Meulenbroeks написал: - a way to indicate that a file is installed but purposedly not packaged (e.g. I have such a thing in mythtv with a README file) This could be by creating a pseudo-package (like -unused or -ignore) which can be used to add files that are explicitly not packaged Shouldn't such files be removed with do_install_append()? my uneducated suggestion would be dont remove them and do something like Frans suggests, reason being I am noticing packages that do not build with files that you would expect especially ones with -dev tags. or even some not being made like libgcc-dev. But like one off the top of my head would be if you install libpcap and libcap-dev you still do not get a pcap.h to use if you compile something on the machine your built those packages into the image of. ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH,V2 0/6] libtool 2.4 upgrade
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07-10-10 03:46, Khem Raj wrote:
Hi
Following set of patches is v2 of the patches adding support for getting
libtool 2.4 into
openemebedded. I have so far built minimal-image for two machines
successfully using old
and new libtool.
The libtool sysroot feature knob is added through LIBTOOL_HAS_SYSROOT
variable. If this is
set to yes then you ought to use libtool 2.4 by default its set to no
which means
the current behavior remains.
The big change that libtool 2.4 brings is sysroot support and I have added
support to use this feature. It should make our life easier.
This needs a lot of testing.
Please cherry pick the patch bundle and give it a try in yout environment
Some distros pin libtool version to 2.2.6b
include/preferred-slugos-versions.inc
include/angstrom-2008-preferred-versions.inc
include/kaeilos-2009-preferred-versions.inc
include/angstrom-2010-preferred-versions.inc
include/preferred-shr-versions.inc
So if you are using one of these distro's then you might have
to override the version in your local.conf
LIBTOOL_HAS_SYSROOT = yes
LIBTOOL_VER = 2.4
PREFERRED_VERSION_libtool = ${LIBTOOL_VER}
PREFERRED_VERSION_libtool-native= ${LIBTOOL_VER}
PREFERRED_VERSION_libtool-cross = ${LIBTOOL_VER}
PREFERRED_VERSION_libtool-nativesdk = ${LIBTOOL_VER}
PREFERRED_VERSION_libtool-sdk = ${LIBTOOL_VER}
Please review, test, and provide feedback
Libtool-sdk_2.4.bb was missing, so I just pushed a version that makes
pkgconfig-sdk build, but it fails in meta-toolchain since it installs
files that are clashing with binutils-sdk. Could you have a look at that
please?
regards,
Koen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFMsw2AMkyGM64RGpERArhjAKCwxaL5N2wxpCw/mxDHjNkyu3igJgCgqZ7e
xajKCa+yK0st6GL/vMg91uM=
=rT5A
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] zsafe
Dnia poniedziałek, 11 października 2010 o 13:46:06 Frans Meulenbroeks napisał(a): 2010/10/11 Marcin Juszkiewicz mar...@juszkiewicz.com.pl: Dropping that FILES_zsafe = zsafe line may be safe - but I would suggest doing build to check it. As someone who never played with opie, I'll leave it to an expert. bitbake zsafe should work for any device in OE. Do Angstrom arm build. Regards, -- JID: h...@jabber.org Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] testing branch 2010-10-08
On 10/11/2010 09:34 AM, Sledz, Steffen wrote:
do_configure still fails for epiphany-2.30.2-r3 (see
http://tinderbox.openembedded.net/packages/835265/) with:
checking location of system Certificate Authority list...
configure: error: could not find. Use --with-ca-file=path
to set, or --without-ca-file to disable
I thought the additional ca-certifactes dependency (see thread
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/37453/focus=37585)
fixes this, but it does not seem so. :(
I'd a look into my openSUSE-system and there epiphany uses
a file /var/lib/ca-certificates/ca-bundle.pem (linked to
/etc/ssl/ca-bundle.pem) installed by the ca-certificates package.
The OE ca-certificates package does not install such a bundle.
So may be that's the real problem.
A look into the ca-certificates recipe shows this:
pkg_postinst_${PN} () {
/usr/sbin/update-ca-certificates
}
I think this is to late if another package needs the result from this call in
its configuration stage.
Steffen
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] testing branch 2010-10-08
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11-10-10 17:34, Sledz, Steffen wrote:
On 10/11/2010 09:34 AM, Sledz, Steffen wrote:
do_configure still fails for epiphany-2.30.2-r3 (see
http://tinderbox.openembedded.net/packages/835265/) with:
checking location of system Certificate Authority list...
configure: error: could not find. Use --with-ca-file=path
to set, or --without-ca-file to disable
I thought the additional ca-certifactes dependency (see thread
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/37453/focus=37585)
fixes this, but it does not seem so. :(
I'd a look into my openSUSE-system and there epiphany uses
a file /var/lib/ca-certificates/ca-bundle.pem (linked to
/etc/ssl/ca-bundle.pem) installed by the ca-certificates package.
The OE ca-certificates package does not install such a bundle.
So may be that's the real problem.
A look into the ca-certificates recipe shows this:
pkg_postinst_${PN} () {
/usr/sbin/update-ca-certificates
}
I think this is to late if another package needs the result from this call in
its configuration stage.
That's missing a $D check as well, since in that form it can't be run
off-line
regards,
Koen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFMszX9MkyGM64RGpERAntxAJ4ks0QTGm4TYe0I4oFZkJkVibnYxQCfX383
lMq5v0la+u26N9XyIUdTVFk=
=6Bnt
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
* While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building
into my file system I found that for some packages the
LICENSE value set in the recipe was either incorrect or
generic and not detailed enough. This patch is my attempt
to update the LICENSE fields for these packages to match
the actual versions of the licenses in the sources.
Signed-off-by: Chase Maupin chase.mau...@ti.com
---
Added in version 2:
* Checked sources and updated GPLv2 packages to GPLv2+ if the
or later clause was found in the sources.
* Changed the separator for packages licensed under multiple
licenses to | instead of /
---
recipes/autoconf/autoconf.inc |2 +-
recipes/autoconf/autoconf213_2.13.bb |1 +
recipes/autoconf/autoconf_2.61.bb |2 ++
recipes/bison/bison.inc|2 +-
recipes/dbus/dbus-c++_git.bb |2 +-
recipes/dbus/dbus-daemon-proxy_git.bb |2 +-
recipes/dbus/dbus-glib.inc |2 +-
recipes/dbus/dbus.inc |2 +-
.../desktop-file-utils-native_0.14.bb |2 +-
.../desktop-file-utils/desktop-file-utils_0.15.bb |2 +-
.../desktop-file-utils/desktop-file-utils_0.16.bb |2 +-
.../desktop-file-utils/desktop-file-utils_0.3.bb |2 +-
.../desktop-file-utils/desktop-file-utils_0.6.bb |2 +-
recipes/e2fsprogs/e2fsprogs.inc|2 +-
recipes/genext2fs/genext2fs.inc|2 +-
recipes/git/git.inc|2 +-
recipes/glib-2.0/glib-2.0_2.22.4.bb|2 +-
recipes/glib-2.0/glib-2.0_2.23.6.bb|2 +-
recipes/glib-2.0/glib-2.0_2.24.0.bb|2 +-
recipes/glib-2.0/glib-2.0_2.24.1.bb|2 +-
recipes/glib-2.0/glib-2.0_2.6.4.bb |2 +-
recipes/glib-2.0/glib-2.0_2.8.6.bb |2 +-
recipes/glib-2.0/glib.inc |2 +-
recipes/iperf/iperf.inc|2 +-
recipes/ipkg-utils/ipkg-link_1.6+cvs20050404.bb|2 +-
recipes/ipkg-utils/ipkg-utils_1.6+cvs20050404.bb |2 +-
recipes/iptables/iptables.inc |2 +-
recipes/libtool/libtool.inc|2 +-
recipes/linux-libc-headers/linux-libc-headers.inc |2 +-
recipes/pkgconfig/pkgconfig.inc|2 +-
recipes/psplash/psplash.inc|2 +-
recipes/quilt/quilt.inc|2 +-
recipes/thttpd/thttpd_2.25b.bb |2 +-
recipes/tinylogin/tinylogin_1.4.bb |2 +-
recipes/unifdef/unifdef-native_2.6.18+git.bb |2 +-
recipes/update-rc.d/update-rc.d_0.7.bb |2 +-
recipes/x-load/signgp.bb |2 +-
recipes/x-load/x-load.inc |2 +-
recipes/xorg-lib/xorg-headers-native.bb|2 ++
39 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/autoconf/autoconf.inc b/recipes/autoconf/autoconf.inc
index 35b0289..70e24a0 100644
--- a/recipes/autoconf/autoconf.inc
+++ b/recipes/autoconf/autoconf.inc
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
DESCRIPTION = A package of M4 macros to produce scripts to \
automatically configure sourcecode.
-LICENSE = GPL
+LICENSE = GPLv3+exception
HOMEPAGE = http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/;
SECTION = devel
DEPENDS += m4-native
diff --git a/recipes/autoconf/autoconf213_2.13.bb
b/recipes/autoconf/autoconf213_2.13.bb
index d060bbd..cd55073 100644
--- a/recipes/autoconf/autoconf213_2.13.bb
+++ b/recipes/autoconf/autoconf213_2.13.bb
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
require autoconf.inc
+LICENSE = GPLv2+
SRC_URI = ${GNU_MIRROR}/autoconf/autoconf-${PV}.tar.gz
EXTRA_OECONF = --program-transform-name=s/\$/2.13/
EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'acdatadir=${datadir}/autoconf-${PV}
infodir=${datadir}/autoconf-${PV}/info'
diff --git a/recipes/autoconf/autoconf_2.61.bb
b/recipes/autoconf/autoconf_2.61.bb
index 9542e21..4588608 100644
--- a/recipes/autoconf/autoconf_2.61.bb
+++ b/recipes/autoconf/autoconf_2.61.bb
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
require autoconf.inc
+LICENSE = GPLv2+
+
PR = ${INC_PR}.1
SRC_URI += file://autoreconf-include.patch \
diff --git a/recipes/bison/bison.inc b/recipes/bison/bison.inc
index 3441bcf..023895e 100644
--- a/recipes/bison/bison.inc
+++ b/recipes/bison/bison.inc
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
DESCRIPTION = GNU Project parser generator (yacc replacement).
HOMEPAGE = http://www.gnu.org/software/bison/;
-LICENSE = GPL
+LICENSE = GPLv2+
SECTION = devel
PRIORITY = optional
DEPENDS = virtual/libintl flex-native
diff --git a/recipes/dbus/dbus-c++_git.bb b/recipes/dbus/dbus-c++_git.bb
index 7d9db3e..6459823 100644
--- a/recipes/dbus/dbus-c++_git.bb
+++ b/recipes/dbus/dbus-c++_git.bb
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
DESCRIPTION = C++ bindings for dbus
-LICENSE = LGPL
+LICENSE = LGPLv2.1+
SECTION = libs
DEPENDS = dbus
Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
2010/10/11 Chase Maupin chasemaupi...@gmail.com: * While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building into my file system I found that for some packages the LICENSE value set in the recipe was either incorrect or generic and not detailed enough. This patch is my attempt to update the LICENSE fields for these packages to match the actual versions of the licenses in the sources. [...] -LICENSE = GPLv2 +LICENSE = GPLv2+ Doe we want this? I think most GPLv2 code carries the clause: This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. Yet currently virtually all of these have GPL or GPLv2 as LICENSE v2+ versions: enblend/plotutils_2.6.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ ffmpeg/ffmpeg_svn.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ gnome/epiphany_2.30.2.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ gpe-package/gpe-package_0.4.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ libftdi/libftdi_0.18.bb:LICENSE = LGPL GPLv2+linking exception libnfo/libnfo.inc:LICENSE = LGPLv2+ lzo/lzo2_2.03.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ raw-tools/exiv2_0.20.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ sysvinit/sysvinit_2.86.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ udev/udev.inc:LICENSE = GPLv2+ udev/udev_151.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ udev/udev_154.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] cpio: update 2.5 to 2.11
On 10/11/2010 01:36 AM, Paul Menzel wrote: Am Sonntag, den 10.10.2010, 22:42 -0700 schrieb Scott Garman: Signed-off-by: Scott Garmansgar...@zenlinux.com I build tested your patch for minimal-eglibc for `MACHINE = beagleboard`. Thanks! diff --git a/recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch b/recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch new file mode 100644 index 000..059976c --- /dev/null +++ b/recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ +# Avoid multiple stat definitions +# Patch taken from cpio mailing list posting 2010-03-19 +# +# Signed-off-by: Scott Garmansgar...@zenlinux.com Please include the link to that message in the archive. Will do, respin on its way shortly... Scott -- Scott Garman sgarman at zenlinux dot com ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCH v2] cpio: update 2.5 to 2.11
Signed-off-by: Scott Garman sgar...@zenlinux.com
---
recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch | 16 +
recipes/cpio/cpio_2.11.bb| 42 +++
recipes/cpio/cpio_2.5.bb | 42 ---
recipes/cpio/files/install.patch | 61 --
4 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 103 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch
create mode 100644 recipes/cpio/cpio_2.11.bb
delete mode 100644 recipes/cpio/cpio_2.5.bb
delete mode 100644 recipes/cpio/files/install.patch
diff --git a/recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch
b/recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000..c3117c9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes/cpio/cpio-2.11/statdef.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+# Avoid multiple stat definitions
+# Patch written by Naohiro Aota, taken from cpio mailing list:
+# http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-cpio/2010-03/msg5.html
+#
+# Signed-off-by: Scott Garman sgar...@zenlinux.com
+
+diff -urN cpio-2.11.orig/src/filetypes.h cpio-2.11/src/filetypes.h
+--- cpio-2.11.orig/src/filetypes.h 2010-02-12 02:19:23.0 -0800
cpio-2.11/src/filetypes.h 2010-07-23 13:17:25.0 -0700
+@@ -82,4 +82,6 @@
+ #define lstat stat
+ #endif
+ int lstat ();
++#ifndef stat
+ int stat ();
++#endif
diff --git a/recipes/cpio/cpio_2.11.bb b/recipes/cpio/cpio_2.11.bb
new file mode 100644
index 000..42b3676
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes/cpio/cpio_2.11.bb
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+DESCRIPTION = GNU cpio is a program to manage archives of files.
+HOMEPAGE = http://www.gnu.org/software/cpio/;
+SECTION = console
+LICENSE = GPLv3
+PR = r0
+
+DEPENDS = texinfo-native
+
+SRC_URI = ${GNU_MIRROR}/cpio/cpio-${PV}.tar.gz \
+ file://statdef.patch \
+
+
+SRC_URI[md5sum] = 1112bb6c45863468b5496ba128792f6c
+SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
601b1d774cd6e4cd39416203c91ec59dbd65dd27d79d75e1a9b89497ea643978
+
+inherit autotools gettext
+
+do_install () {
+autotools_do_install
+install -d ${D}${base_bindir}/
+mv ${D}${bindir}/cpio ${D}${base_bindir}/cpio.${PN}
+case ${TARGET_OS} in
+*-uclibc*) ;;
+*) mv ${D}${libexecdir}/rmt ${D}${libexecdir}/rmt.${PN} ;;
+esac
+}
+
+pkg_postinst_${PN} () {
+update-alternatives --install ${base_bindir}/cpio cpio cpio.${PN} 100
+if [ -f ${libexecdir}/rmt.${PN} ]
+then
+update-alternatives --install ${libexecdir}/rmt rmt rmt.${PN} 50
+fi
+}
+
+pkg_prerm_${PN} () {
+update-alternatives --remove cpio cpio.${PN}
+if [ -f ${libexecdir}/rmt.${PN} ]
+then
+update-alternatives --remove rmt rmt.${PN}
+fi
+}
diff --git a/recipes/cpio/cpio_2.5.bb b/recipes/cpio/cpio_2.5.bb
deleted file mode 100644
index b4504ba..000
--- a/recipes/cpio/cpio_2.5.bb
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,42 +0,0 @@
-DESCRIPTION = GNU cpio is a program to manage archives of files.
-HOMEPAGE = http://www.gnu.org/software/cpio/;
-SECTION = console
-LICENSE = GPL
-PR = r5
-
-DEPENDS += texinfo-native
-
-SRC_URI = ${GNU_MIRROR}/cpio/cpio-${PV}.tar.gz \
- file://install.patch
-S = ${WORKDIR}/cpio-${PV}
-
-inherit autotools
-
-do_install () {
- autotools_do_install
- install -d ${D}${base_bindir}/
- mv ${D}${bindir}/cpio ${D}${base_bindir}/cpio.${PN}
- case ${TARGET_OS} in
- *-uclibc*) ;;
- *) mv ${D}${libexecdir}/rmt ${D}${libexecdir}/rmt.${PN} ;;
- esac
-}
-
-pkg_postinst_${PN} () {
- update-alternatives --install ${base_bindir}/cpio cpio cpio.${PN} 100
- if [ -f ${libexecdir}/rmt.${PN} ]
- then
- update-alternatives --install ${libexecdir}/rmt rmt rmt.${PN} 50
- fi
-}
-
-pkg_prerm_${PN} () {
- update-alternatives --remove cpio cpio.${PN}
- if [ -f ${libexecdir}/rmt.${PN} ]
- then
- update-alternatives --remove rmt rmt.${PN}
- fi
-}
-
-SRC_URI[md5sum] = e02859af1d73fcbf757acb57e0a4
-SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
dbf79293d0cafa7d7a3a266c2b0b90c00d556e7b3185d4243c74153291da24c8
diff --git a/recipes/cpio/files/install.patch b/recipes/cpio/files/install.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 3554156..000
--- a/recipes/cpio/files/install.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,61 +0,0 @@
-
-#
-# Patch managed by http://www.holgerschurig.de/patcher.html
-#
-
cpio-2.5/Makefile.in~install.patch
-+++ cpio-2.5/Makefile.in
-@@ -70,6 +70,7 @@
- # Prefix for each installed man page, normally empty or `g'.
- manprefix =
-
-+DESTDIR =
-
- # Where to install the cpio and mt executables.
- bindir = @bindir@
-@@ -123,19 +124,19 @@
- $(CC) -c $(CPPFLAGS) $(DEFS) -I$(srcdir) $(CFLAGS) $
-
- install:: installdirs all $(srcdir)/cpio.1 $(srcdir)/mt.1
-- $(INSTALL_PROGRAM) cpio $(bindir)/$(binprefix)cpio
-- test ! -f mt || $(INSTALL_PROGRAM) mt $(bindir)/$(binprefix)mt
-- -test ! -f rmt || $(INSTALL_PROGRAM) rmt $(libexecdir)/rmt
-- -$(INSTALL_DATA) $(srcdir)/cpio.1 $(mandir)/$(manprefix)cpio.$(manext)
--
Re: [oe] [RFC] unpackaged files
2010/10/11 Roman I Khimov khi...@altell.ru: В сообщении от Понедельник 11 октября 2010 15:51:05 автор Frans Meulenbroeks написал: - a way to indicate that a file is installed but purposedly not packaged (e.g. I have such a thing in mythtv with a README file) This could be by creating a pseudo-package (like -unused or -ignore) which can be used to add files that are explicitly not packaged Shouldn't such files be removed with do_install_append()? This is also an option. Didn't think of that one. No preference for one or another. And in either case we might want to allow choosing this to be handled as error (and, in due time be forced to be an error) Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [RFC] unpackaged files
2010/10/11 J. L. vwyodap...@gmail.com: On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Roman I Khimov khi...@altell.ru wrote: В сообщении от Понедельник 11 октября 2010 15:51:05 автор Frans Meulenbroeks написал: - a way to indicate that a file is installed but purposedly not packaged (e.g. I have such a thing in mythtv with a README file) This could be by creating a pseudo-package (like -unused or -ignore) which can be used to add files that are explicitly not packaged Shouldn't such files be removed with do_install_append()? rethinking this (after my previous mail) would we get an issue because some files are staged but not packaged (which is generally not the case, but I am thinking about gcc-cross and friends) my uneducated suggestion would be dont remove them and do something like Frans suggests, reason being I am noticing packages that do not build with files that you would expect especially ones with -dev tags. or even some not being made like libgcc-dev. But like one off the top of my head would be if you install libpcap and libcap-dev you still do not get a pcap.h to use if you compile something on the machine your built those packages into the image of. it is not my proposal to make this a real installable package. I just want a mechanism that you can use to tell that a file while being there is on purpose not packaged Wrt your example: I'd say if pcap.h comes from libcpcap, it should probably go into libpcap-dev (or maybe libcap-dev). Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
-Original Message- From: openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org [mailto:openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of Frans Meulenbroeks Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 12:41 PM To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields 2010/10/11 Chase Maupin chasemaupi...@gmail.com: * While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building into my file system I found that for some packages the LICENSE value set in the recipe was either incorrect or generic and not detailed enough. This patch is my attempt to update the LICENSE fields for these packages to match the actual versions of the licenses in the sources. [...] -LICENSE = GPLv2 +LICENSE = GPLv2+ Doe we want this? I think most GPLv2 code carries the clause: This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. Yet currently virtually all of these have GPL or GPLv2 as LICENSE Frans, My original version of this patch was just changing GPL to GPLv2 for example. But I was asked about whether it should be GPLv2+ which I guess is more indicative of the or later clause. Does anyone have good guidance here on how to denote things that are GPLv2 only for now (like git which Linux has a note in the COPYING file about it being GPLv2) and things that are GPLv2 or later version? I'm trying for consistency here but I guess there doesn't seem to be a set policy for how the LICENSE field should be set. v2+ versions: enblend/plotutils_2.6.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ ffmpeg/ffmpeg_svn.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ gnome/epiphany_2.30.2.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ gpe-package/gpe-package_0.4.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ libftdi/libftdi_0.18.bb:LICENSE = LGPL GPLv2+linking exception libnfo/libnfo.inc:LICENSE = LGPLv2+ lzo/lzo2_2.03.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ raw-tools/exiv2_0.20.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ sysvinit/sysvinit_2.86.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ udev/udev.inc:LICENSE = GPLv2+ udev/udev_151.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ udev/udev_154.bb:LICENSE = GPLv2+ ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11-10-10 20:14, Maupin, Chase wrote: -Original Message- From: openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org [mailto:openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of Frans Meulenbroeks Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 12:41 PM To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields 2010/10/11 Chase Maupin chasemaupi...@gmail.com: * While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building into my file system I found that for some packages the LICENSE value set in the recipe was either incorrect or generic and not detailed enough. This patch is my attempt to update the LICENSE fields for these packages to match the actual versions of the licenses in the sources. [...] -LICENSE = GPLv2 +LICENSE = GPLv2+ Doe we want this? I think most GPLv2 code carries the clause: This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. Yet currently virtually all of these have GPL or GPLv2 as LICENSE Frans, My original version of this patch was just changing GPL to GPLv2 for example. But I was asked about whether it should be GPLv2+ which I guess is more indicative of the or later clause. Does anyone have good guidance here on how to denote things that are GPLv2 only for now (like git which Linux has a note in the COPYING file about it being GPLv2) and things that are GPLv2 or later version? I'm trying for consistency here but I guess there doesn't seem to be a set policy for how the LICENSE field should be set. The current policy is: GPLv1 - GPL version 1 GPLv1+ - GPL version 1 or later GPLv2 - GPL version 2 GPLv2+ - GPL version 2 or later GPLv3 - GPL version 3 GPLv3+ - GPL version 3 or later This was done to make it immediately clear which GPL license it's using so you can decide to drop GPLv2+ and GPLv3 from your manifest if you want secure boot or enforce patents. regards, Koen -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFMs1olMkyGM64RGpERAsAeAJ90Gp4LBCEyDQOYKMQswvyD5ymbhwCdHdH/ 2Lt14nkyseMjn1ScePVbF34= =x1oc -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] openjade: return oj-native-libosp-fix.patch, lost in BBCLASSEXTEND change fdf02c61607acb5046afaa11c5c682ab99f4d508
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 01:14:57PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
---
recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb |5 +++--
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
b/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
index 238586b..9462636 100644
--- a/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
+++ b/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
@@ -5,9 +5,10 @@ DESCRIPTION = OpenJade is a suite of tools for validating, \
processing, and applying DSSSL (Document Style Semantics and \
Specification Language) stylesheets to SGML and XML documents.
LICENSE = BSD
-PR = r2
+PR = r3
SRC_URI = ${SOURCEFORGE_MIRROR}/openjade/openjade-${PV}.tar.gz \
-file://configure.patch \
+ file://oj-native-libosp-fix.patch \
+ file://configure.patch \
inherit autotools
Didnt you forgot the oj-native-libosp-fix.patch or came it from an earlier
version?
Bye Henning
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
2010/10/11 Maupin, Chase chase.mau...@ti.com: -Original Message- From: openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org [mailto:openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of Frans Meulenbroeks Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 12:41 PM To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields 2010/10/11 Chase Maupin chasemaupi...@gmail.com: * While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building into my file system I found that for some packages the LICENSE value set in the recipe was either incorrect or generic and not detailed enough. This patch is my attempt to update the LICENSE fields for these packages to match the actual versions of the licenses in the sources. [...] -LICENSE = GPLv2 +LICENSE = GPLv2+ Doe we want this? I think most GPLv2 code carries the clause: This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. Yet currently virtually all of these have GPL or GPLv2 as LICENSE Frans, My original version of this patch was just changing GPL to GPLv2 for example. But I was asked about whether it should be GPLv2+ which I guess is more indicative of the or later clause. Does anyone have good guidance here on how to denote things that are GPLv2 only for now (like git which Linux has a note in the COPYING file about it being GPLv2) and things that are GPLv2 or later version? I'm trying for consistency here but I guess there doesn't seem to be a set policy for how the LICENSE field should be set. I have no personal preference, but was just noting the difference. How do others feel about thi? BTW: please don't take this personal. I really appreciate you doing this, but I also am very aware that it is a boring and non-rewarrding job, so we should better aim at getting it right te first time. Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] openjade: return oj-native-libosp-fix.patch, lost in BBCLASSEXTEND change fdf02c61607acb5046afaa11c5c682ab99f4d508
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 08:49:35PM +0200, Henning Heinold wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 01:14:57PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
---
recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb |5 +++--
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
b/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
index 238586b..9462636 100644
--- a/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
+++ b/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
@@ -5,9 +5,10 @@ DESCRIPTION = OpenJade is a suite of tools for
validating, \
processing, and applying DSSSL (Document Style Semantics and \
Specification Language) stylesheets to SGML and XML documents.
LICENSE = BSD
-PR = r2
+PR = r3
SRC_URI = ${SOURCEFORGE_MIRROR}/openjade/openjade-${PV}.tar.gz \
- file://configure.patch \
+ file://oj-native-libosp-fix.patch \
+ file://configure.patch \
inherit autotools
Didnt you forgot the oj-native-libosp-fix.patch or came it from an earlier
version?
no, it was lost from SRC_URI in previous patch (replacing openjade-native with
BBCLASSEXTEND), but file is still there and doesn't seem to do any harm
to non-native version as well (so applied to both now).
Regards,
--
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: martin.ja...@gmail.com
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] bitbake COMPATIBLE_MACHINE stack backtrace
[this was still in my concepts folder, thought I'd sent it out last week]
Hi,
If I run bitbake (git head of about a week ago) with a recipe that has
COMPATIBLE_MACHINE set and that is not for my machine, I get a bitbake
tracedump;
Log;
fr...@linux-suse:~/oe/openembedded/recipes/zaurus-utils grep COMPAT *
encdec-updater.bb:COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = '(poodle|c7x0|spitz|akita|tosa)'
nandlogical_1.0.0.bb:COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = (poodle|c7x0|akita|spitz|tosa)
zaurus-installer.bb:COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = '(collie|poodle|c7x0|spitz|akita|tosa)'
zaurus-legacy-tar.bb:COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = spitz
zaurus-updater.bb:COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = '(poodle|c7x0|spitz|akita|tosa)'
fr...@linux-suse:~/oe/openembedded/recipes/zaurus-utils bitbake -b
zaurus-legacy-tar.bb
ERROR: Command execution failed: Traceback (most recent call last):
File /home/frans/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py, line 88, in runAsyncCommand
commandmethod(self.cmds_async, self, options)
File /home/frans/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py, line 174, in buildFile
command.cooker.buildFile(bfile, task)
File /home/frans/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/cooker.py, line 650, in buildFile
self.status.task_deps[fn]['depends'] = {}
TypeError: 'NoneType' object does not support item assignment
fr...@linux-suse:~/oe/openembedded/recipes/zaurus-utils bitbake
zaurus-legacy-tar
NOTE: Handling BitBake files: - (7148/7148) [100 %]
Parsing of 7148 .bb files complete (6693 cached, 455 parsed). 7333
targets, 330 skipped, 0 masked, 0 errors.
NOTE: oestats: build 93365
ERROR: Nothing PROVIDES 'zaurus-legacy-tar'
ERROR: Command execution failed: Traceback (most recent call last):
File /home/frans/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py, line 88, in runAsyncCommand
commandmethod(self.cmds_async, self, options)
File /home/frans/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py, line 184, in buildTargets
command.cooker.buildTargets(pkgs_to_build, task)
File /home/frans/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/cooker.py, line 737, in buildTargets
taskdata.add_provider(localdata, self.status, k)
File /home/frans/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 357, in add_provider
self.add_provider_internal(cfgData, dataCache, item)
File /home/frans/oe/bitbake/lib/bb/taskdata.py, line 377, in
add_provider_internal
raise bb.providers.NoProvider(item)
NoProvider: zaurus-legacy-tar
Especially in the first case there is no real error message.
I seem to recall (but have not verified) that 1.10 handled this
without traceback.
Any
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
2010/10/11 Koen Kooi k.k...@student.utwente.nl: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11-10-10 20:14, Maupin, Chase wrote: -Original Message- From: openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org [mailto:openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of Frans Meulenbroeks Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 12:41 PM To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields 2010/10/11 Chase Maupin chasemaupi...@gmail.com: * While verifying the licensing for the packages I am building into my file system I found that for some packages the LICENSE value set in the recipe was either incorrect or generic and not detailed enough. This patch is my attempt to update the LICENSE fields for these packages to match the actual versions of the licenses in the sources. [...] -LICENSE = GPLv2 +LICENSE = GPLv2+ Doe we want this? I think most GPLv2 code carries the clause: This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. Yet currently virtually all of these have GPL or GPLv2 as LICENSE Frans, My original version of this patch was just changing GPL to GPLv2 for example. But I was asked about whether it should be GPLv2+ which I guess is more indicative of the or later clause. Does anyone have good guidance here on how to denote things that are GPLv2 only for now (like git which Linux has a note in the COPYING file about it being GPLv2) and things that are GPLv2 or later version? I'm trying for consistency here but I guess there doesn't seem to be a set policy for how the LICENSE field should be set. The current policy is: GPLv1 - GPL version 1 GPLv1+ - GPL version 1 or later GPLv2 - GPL version 2 GPLv2+ - GPL version 2 or later GPLv3 - GPL version 3 GPLv3+ - GPL version 3 or later This was done to make it immediately clear which GPL license it's using so you can decide to drop GPLv2+ and GPLv3 from your manifest if you want secure boot or enforce patents. regards, Koen I'm not sure if it is a policy. Haven't seen it being pulished as such. Having said that, I have no problems with it (although there is no problem with enforcing patents or so for v2+ , as that still falls under the v2 umbrella). I guess most of our recipes that say GPLv2 are wrong and are v2+. It might be hard to distinguish between these though, it could well be that the license file says v2 and a comment in the code says v2+. Glad I do not have to deal with this any more Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [RFC] unpackaged files
2010/10/11 Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com: 2010/10/11 J. L. vwyodap...@gmail.com: On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Roman I Khimov khi...@altell.ru wrote: В сообщении от Понедельник 11 октября 2010 15:51:05 автор Frans Meulenbroeks написал: - a way to indicate that a file is installed but purposedly not packaged (e.g. I have such a thing in mythtv with a README file) This could be by creating a pseudo-package (like -unused or -ignore) which can be used to add files that are explicitly not packaged Shouldn't such files be removed with do_install_append()? rethinking this (after my previous mail) would we get an issue because some files are staged but not packaged (which is generally not the case, but I am thinking about gcc-cross and friends) my uneducated suggestion would be dont remove them and do something like Frans suggests, reason being I am noticing packages that do not build with files that you would expect especially ones with -dev tags. or even some not being made like libgcc-dev. But like one off the top of my head would be if you install libpcap and libcap-dev you still do not get a pcap.h to use if you compile something on the machine your built those packages into the image of. it is not my proposal to make this a real installable package. I just want a mechanism that you can use to tell that a file while being there is on purpose not packaged Wrt your example: I'd say if pcap.h comes from libcpcap, it should probably go into libpcap-dev (or maybe libcap-dev). Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel Ahh ok sorry miss understood what you wanted. I did run into another one where I installed the built mysql5 and mysql5-dev and it does not provide a mysql.h on the machine, also lots of .dev packages rely on libgcc-dev but there is not an installable version of libgcc-dev. So if you install a -dev after you have the image running you get complaints about no libgcc-dev on the machine. So if I run into things like that I would need to go to that package and figure out why and how to get the .h's I need in the .dev and or figure out how to make the missing -dev ? Thanks ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] gobject-introspection: pkg-config does not pick correct paths (was: pkg-config does not honor `PKG_CONFIG_SYSROOT_DIR`)
Am Montag, den 11.10.2010, 03:35 +0200 schrieb Frederik Sdun:
* Paul Menzel paulepan...@users.sourceforge.net [11.10.2010 01:03]:
Am Montag, den 11.10.2010, 00:47 +0200 schrieb Frederik Sdun:
* Paul Menzel paulepan...@users.sourceforge.net [11.10.2010 00:17]:
Am Sonntag, den 10.10.2010, 11:11 -0700 schrieb Chris Larson:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Paul Menzel wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 10.10.2010, 10:09 -0700 schrieb Chris Larson:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Paul Menzel wrote:
[…]
Secondly I am having a similar problem with `gobject-introspection`
where [1]
gir/Makefile.am:GLIB_INCLUDEDIR=$(shell pkg-config
--variable=includedir glib-2.0)/glib-2.0
gir/Makefile.am:GLIB_LIBDIR=$(shell pkg-config
--variable=libdir glib-2.0)
returns the wrong path.
Making all in gir
make[2]: Entering directory
`/oe/build-minimal-libc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gobject-introspection-0.9.12-r0/gobject-introspection-0.9.12/gir'
make[2]: *** No rule to make target
`/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include/glibconfig.h', needed by `GLib-2.0.gir'.
Stop.
make[2]: Leaving directory
`/oe/build-minimal-libc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gobject-introspection-0.9.12-r0/gobject-introspection-0.9.12/gir'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
/usr/{lib,include} paths are mangled by pkg-config using
PKG_CONFIG_SYSROOT_DIR. If that's not happening here, that's a bug
that
should be investigated, but I fail to see how setting PKG_CONFIG is
going to
magically fix it.
Unfortunately I could not figure out, what is going on. My suspicion is,
that the function `shell` of the Makefile does not honor the environment
variables.
I tried to change the syntax to
GLIB_INCLUDEDIR := `$(PKG_CONFIG) --variable=includedir
glib-2.0`/glib-2.0
GLIB_LIBDIR := `$(PKG_CONFIG) --variable=libdir glib-2.0`
(`git grep PKG_CONFIG` to see that this is used in some places) or
GLIB_INCLUDEDIR=$(shell
/oe/build-minimal-libc/minimal-dev/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/pkg-config
--variable=includedir glib-2.0)/glib-2.0
GLIB_LIBDIR := $(shell
/oe/build-minimal-libc/minimal-dev/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/pkgconfig
--variable=libdir glib-2.0)
but although the second one worked on the command line, it did not work
and did not return any path at all. (I edited `Makefile` in `work` and
executed `run.do_compile.…` manually.)
I also looked at the changes of pkg-config [1] after 0.23, but could not
find anything applicable to this problem.
[1] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/pkg-config/tree/NEWS
I think the problem is, that pkg-config --variable is used here, which
doesn't expand the paths.
I try to provide a patch, which make it possible to specify the sysroot
and uses pkg-config --cflags-only-I for the flags
That is a good idea. But remember that the staged package config files
have the full path included already.
$
/oe/build-minimal-libc/minimal-dev/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/pkg-config
--variable=libdir glib-2.0
/oe/build-minimal-libc/minimal-dev/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/lib
or
$
PKG_CONFIG_DIR=/home/paul/oe/build-minimal-libc/minimal-dev/sysroots/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/usr/lib/pkgconfig
~/oe/build-minimal-libc/minimal-dev/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/pkg-config
--variable=libdir glib-2.0
/oe/build-minimal-libc/minimal-dev/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/lib
Thanks,
Paul
I added some prints to dumper.py from gobject-introspection and it seems
that pkg-config doesn't provide the correct -L flags, even if I specify
--libs-only-L. Any ideas how to fix this?
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Here's a diff of my current status.
introspection.tar.gz
Description: application/compressed-tar
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCHv2] recipe licenses: update recipe LICENSE fields
I'm not sure if it is a policy. Haven't seen it being pulished as such. Having said that, I have no problems with it (although there is no problem with enforcing patents or so for v2+ , as that still falls under the v2 umbrella). I guess most of our recipes that say GPLv2 are wrong and are v2+. It might be hard to distinguish between these though, it could well be that the license file says v2 and a comment in the code says v2+. Glad I do not have to deal with this any more Frans, That is exactly the issue that is so annoying. The COPYING file usually says the standard GPLv2, but if you go and read the license text in the code that is where it says GPLv2 (or later) so GPLv2+. This patch was modified to go off the license in the code since that is more likely what the developer actually intended and not an auto-generated file. Koen, What about GPLv3 licensed files with an exception? Right now I have that as GPLv3+exception. Was there ever any discussion about how to handle these? I am trying to indicate that it is not a standard GPLv3 license. Chase Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCH] gedit: add dependencies enchant gnome-doc-utils-native
* 'bitbake gedit' on clean system failed during
* configure: missing enchant
* compile: gedit.xml unknown element article
Signed-off-by: Andreas Mueller schnitzelt...@gmx.de
---
recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb b/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
index 83dffcf..4ab204c 100644
--- a/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
+++ b/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = GNOME editor
SECTION = x11/gnome
LICENSE = GPL
-DEPENDS = iso-codes gnome-common glib-2.0 gtk+ gconf gtksourceview2
+DEPENDS = iso-codes gnome-common glib-2.0 gtk+ gconf gtksourceview2 enchant
gnome-doc-utils-native
RDEPENDS_${PN} += gtksourceview2
PR = r2
--
1.7.2.3
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [PATCH] openjade: return oj-native-libosp-fix.patch, lost in BBCLASSEXTEND change fdf02c61607acb5046afaa11c5c682ab99f4d508
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Martin Jansa martin.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 08:49:35PM +0200, Henning Heinold wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 01:14:57PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
---
recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb | 5 +++--
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
b/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
index 238586b..9462636 100644
--- a/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
+++ b/recipes/openjade/openjade_1.3.2.bb
@@ -5,9 +5,10 @@ DESCRIPTION = OpenJade is a suite of tools for
validating, \
processing, and applying DSSSL (Document Style Semantics and \
Specification Language) stylesheets to SGML and XML documents.
LICENSE = BSD
-PR = r2
+PR = r3
SRC_URI = ${SOURCEFORGE_MIRROR}/openjade/openjade-${PV}.tar.gz \
- file://configure.patch \
+ file://oj-native-libosp-fix.patch \
+ file://configure.patch \
inherit autotools
Didnt you forgot the oj-native-libosp-fix.patch or came it from an earlier
version?
no, it was lost from SRC_URI in previous patch (replacing openjade-native
with
BBCLASSEXTEND), but file is still there and doesn't seem to do any harm
to non-native version as well (so applied to both now).
I just applied a different patch to fix it.
Regards,
--
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: martin.ja...@gmail.com
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] Wiki moving to OSUOSL
The wiki is moving to the OSUOSL servers at the moment. It should come back in a few hours. DNS is on dotster, and that only updates DNS every four hours. And we don't know when the updates occur, so it could be up to eight. Hopefully, every works in the morning :) Philip ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCH 1/4] gedit: sort `DEPENDS` alphabetically
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 00:51:26 +0200
Signed-off-by: Paul Menzel paulepan...@users.sourceforge.net
---
recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb b/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
index 83dffcf..eaf9f32 100644
--- a/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
+++ b/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = GNOME editor
SECTION = x11/gnome
LICENSE = GPL
-DEPENDS = iso-codes gnome-common glib-2.0 gtk+ gconf gtksourceview2
+DEPENDS = gconf gnome-common glib-2.0 gtk+ gtksourceview2 iso-codes
RDEPENDS_${PN} += gtksourceview2
PR = r2
--
1.7.1
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCH 3/4] gedit: add `enchant` to `DEPENDS`
From: Andreas Mueller schnitzelt...@gmx.de
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 22:01:58 +0200
checking for ENCHANT... no
configure: error: Enchant library not found or too old. Use
--disable-spell to build without spell plugin.
ERROR: Function do_configure failed
I build tested this with `minimal-eglibc` for `MACHINE = beagleboard` and it
fixes task `do_configure`.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Mueller schnitzelt...@gmx.de
Acked-by: Paul Menzel paulepan...@users.sourceforge.net
---
recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb b/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
index e426d18..c00a05f 100644
--- a/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
+++ b/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = GNOME editor
SECTION = x11/gnome
LICENSE = GPLv2
-DEPENDS = gconf gnome-common glib-2.0 gtk+ gtksourceview2 iso-codes
+DEPENDS = enchant gconf gnome-common glib-2.0 gtk+ gtksourceview2 iso-codes
RDEPENDS_${PN} += gtksourceview2
PR = r2
--
1.7.1
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [PATCH 4/4] gedit: add `gnome-doc-utils-native` to `DEPENDS`
From: Andreas Mueller schnitzelt...@gmx.de
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 22:01:58 +0200
Otherwise task `do_compile` fails with the following error. `xml2po` is
provided by `gnome-doc-utils-native`.
| xsltproc -o gedit-C.omf --stringparam db2omf.basename gedit
--stringparam db2omf.format 'docbook' --stringparam db2omf.dtd -//OASIS//DTD
DocBook XML V4.1.2//EN --stringparam db2omf.lang C --stringparam
db2omf.omf_dir /usr/share/omf --stringparam db2omf.help_dir
/usr/share/gnome/help --stringparam db2omf.omf_in
/oe/build-minimal-eglibc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gedit-2.30.0-r2/gedit-2.30.0/help/gedit.omf.in
`/oe/build-minimal-eglibc/minimal-dev/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/pkg-config
--variable db2omf gnome-doc-utils` C/gedit.xml || { rm -f gedit-C.omf; exit
1; }
| if ! test -d ar/; then mkdir ar/; fi
| if ! test -d bg/; then mkdir bg/; fi
| if ! test -d ca/; then mkdir ca/; fi
| if [ -f C/gedit.xml ]; then d=../; else
d=/oe/build-minimal-eglibc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gedit-2.30.0-r2/gedit-2.30.0/help/;
fi; \
| mo=ar/ar.mo; \
| if [ -f ${mo} ]; then mo=../${mo}; else
mo=/oe/build-minimal-eglibc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gedit-2.30.0-r2/gedit-2.30.0/help/${mo};
fi; \
| (cd ar/ \
| `which xml2po` -m docbook -e -t ${mo} \
| ${d}C/gedit.xml gedit.xml.tmp \
| cp gedit.xml.tmp gedit.xml rm -f gedit.xml.tmp)
| if [ -f C/gedit.xml ]; then d=../; else
d=/oe/build-minimal-eglibc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gedit-2.30.0-r2/gedit-2.30.0/help/;
fi; \
| mo=ca/ca.mo; \
| if [ -f ${mo} ]; then mo=../${mo}; else
mo=/oe/build-minimal-eglibc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gedit-2.30.0-r2/gedit-2.30.0/help/${mo};
fi; \
| (cd ca/ \
| `which xml2po` -m docbook -e -t ${mo} \
| ${d}C/gedit.xml gedit.xml.tmp \
| cp gedit.xml.tmp gedit.xml rm -f gedit.xml.tmp)
| if [ -f C/gedit.xml ]; then d=../; else
d=/oe/build-minimal-eglibc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gedit-2.30.0-r2/gedit-2.30.0/help/;
fi; \
| mo=bg/bg.mo; \
| if [ -f ${mo} ]; then mo=../${mo}; else
mo=/oe/build-minimal-eglibc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gedit-2.30.0-r2/gedit-2.30.0/help/${mo};
fi; \
| (cd bg/ \
| `which xml2po` -m docbook -e -t ${mo} \
| ${d}C/gedit.xml gedit.xml.tmp \
| cp gedit.xml.tmp gedit.xml rm -f gedit.xml.tmp)
| /bin/sh: line 4: -m: command not found
| /bin/sh: line 4: -m: command not found
| make[2]: *** [ar/gedit.xml] Error 127
| make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs
| make[2]: *** [ca/gedit.xml] Error 127
| /bin/sh: line 4: -m: command not found
| make[2]: *** [bg/gedit.xml] Error 127
| compilation error: file C/gedit.xml line 19 element article
| xsltParseStylesheetProcess : document is not a stylesheet
| make[2]: *** [gedit-C.omf] Error 1
| make[2]: Leaving directory
`/oe/build-minimal-eglibc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gedit-2.30.0-r2/gedit-2.30.0/help'
| make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
| make[1]: Leaving directory
`/oe/build-minimal-eglibc/minimal-dev/work/armv7a-oe-linux-gnueabi/gedit-2.30.0-r2/gedit-2.30.0'
| make: *** [all] Error 2
| FATAL: oe_runmake failed
| ERROR: Function do_compile failed
NOTE: package gedit-2.30.0-r2: task do_compile: Failed
ERROR: TaskFailed event exception, aborting
ERROR: Build of /oe/openembedded/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
do_compile failed
ERROR: Task 12 (/oe/openembedded/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb,
do_compile) failed with 256
ERROR: '/oe/openembedded/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb' failed
ERROR: '/oe/openembedded/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb' failed
Build tested with `minimal-eglibc` for `MACHINE = beagleboard`.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Mueller schnitzelt...@gmx.de
Acked-by: Paul Menzel paulepan...@users.sourceforge.net
---
recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb b/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
index c00a05f..1d0ce78 100644
--- a/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
+++ b/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = GNOME editor
SECTION = x11/gnome
LICENSE = GPLv2
-DEPENDS = enchant gconf gnome-common glib-2.0 gtk+ gtksourceview2 iso-codes
+DEPENDS = enchant gconf gnome-common gnome-doc-utils-native glib-2.0 gtk+
gtksourceview2 iso-codes
RDEPENDS_${PN} += gtksourceview2
PR = r2
--
1.7.1
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Re: [oe] [PATCH] gedit: add dependencies enchant gnome-doc-utils-native
Am Montag, den 11.10.2010, 22:52 +0200 schrieb Frans Meulenbroeks:
2010/10/11 Andreas Mueller schnitzelt...@gmx.de:
* 'bitbake gedit' on clean system failed during
* configure: missing enchant
* compile: gedit.xml unknown element article
Signed-off-by: Andreas Mueller schnitzelt...@gmx.de
---
recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb b/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
index 83dffcf..4ab204c 100644
--- a/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
+++ b/recipes/gnome/gedit_2.30.0.bb
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = GNOME editor
SECTION = x11/gnome
LICENSE = GPL
-DEPENDS = iso-codes gnome-common glib-2.0 gtk+ gconf gtksourceview2
+DEPENDS = iso-codes gnome-common glib-2.0 gtk+ gconf gtksourceview2
enchant gnome-doc-utils-native
RDEPENDS_${PN} += gtksourceview2
PR = r2
I can understand from your commit message why you add enchant to
DEPENDS, however it is not really clear why gnome-doc-utils-native is
added. Is this because of the gedit.xml unknown?
Can you clarify this in the commit message?
I resent this series [1–4]. I tried to keep the meta data intact, but
Andreas it would be nice if you could check again.
Thanks,
Paul
[1] http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/3217/
[2] http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/3218/
[3] http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/3219/
[4] http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/3220/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
