Actually I stand corrected regarding the libgcc issues. The
gcc-package-target.inc file has a FILES_libgcc entry but does not actually
provide this package. This package is provided by the gcc-cross recipe
(gcc-package-cross.inc). So the libgcc problem is coming from here...
-jeremy
Khem Raj gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > I'm not sure what is causing the GNU_HASH issue with the objc libraries...
>
> LDFLAGS are not honored. May be you could try to force the --hash-style option
> into builds of target parts of gcc
>
Why is it only the objc libraries that are affected? It appea
Khem Raj gmail.com> writes:
>
> Due to multilib and nof happens to be first. I think we should patch
> gcc to not generate
> nof version if not asked for.
>
I am not a gcc expert by any stretch of the imagination but if your target has
hard-float support, wouldn't one prefer that over software
The problem here is the libwmf plugin, which is enabled to auto. OE hasnt packed
libwmf yet(besides the lib was last updated 2002). So if you have libwmf-dev
package
installed on your hostmachine the autotools will find libwmf-config from host
and set CLFAGS for the host libwmf, which is infect /u
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Jeremy Williams wrote:
> I am seeing some QA errors when building the gcc target package. The two QA
> errors are .so symlink in non -dev package (for the gcc package) and GNU_HASH
> in
> objc libraries.
>
> Looking into the first issue reveals something puzzling
I am seeing some QA errors when building the gcc target package. The two QA
errors are .so symlink in non -dev package (for the gcc package) and GNU_HASH in
objc libraries.
Looking into the first issue reveals something puzzling to me. If you look at
gcc-package-target.inc, the do_install operatio
I believe this is more an indication of a problem with the abiword
package. My understanding is OE applies a patch to the cross compiler
so that if '/usr/include' (or some sub dir thereof) is ever included the
compile will fail. This is to protect host (the system you are building
on) include fil
saleh usman wrote:
> Hello
>
> I am new to openembedded and I am following Getting started page of
> openembedded to work with it.I am facing problem in Building Software section
> and bitbake command is not working.
> I've edited the local configuration file and also directory where I've
> dow
Dnia piątek, 4 grudnia 2009 o 15:20:48 Mike Westerhof napisał(a):
> As a reminder, the need is that opkg must run in 32MB of physical RAM -
> it cannot be assumed that swap space is available - and an absolute
> minimum of dependencies on external libraries is required because the
> total rootfs i
Am 04.12.2009 um 15:20 schrieb Mike Westerhof:
> So I'm leaning toward the latter solution right now - I don't want to
> anger those who found the opkg recipe rewrites beneficial. So I'll
> rephrase it now: If you have valid objections to my creating a custom
> SlugOS opkg recipe, voice those co
> [r...@localhost build]# bitbake nano
> bash: bitbake: command not found
> [r...@localhost build]#
>
> Plz tell me where might be the problem.
First problem is you're building as root...
Andrea
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@l
Hello
I am new to openembedded and I am following Getting started page of
openembedded to work with it.I am facing problem in Building Software section
and bitbake command is not working.
I've edited the local configuration file and also directory where I've
downloaded openembedded contains b
Graham Gower wrote:
> 2009/12/4 Mike Westerhof :
>> Commit 2fdf1aa1c869ea9deecee86206f49a2eca9d7c00 (Koen) breaks
>> opkg-nogpg-nocurl. I have no idea what else might be broken, but the
>> fact that it removes all the critical patches that make it work on
>> small-memory machines is the most obvio
Andrea Adami wrote:
> FYI,
>
> I had similar issues with opkg-cl (was linked with libldap of my
> buildhost...[1]).
>
> I thouht it was originated by bump to SRCREV to 413 but a rebuild from
> scratch fixed all.
>
> Please retry the hard way...
This is on a clean build :)
-Mike (mwester)
On 04-12-09 14:29, Martin Jansa wrote:
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 11:12:36AM +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
On 04-12-09 11:04, Martin Jansa wrote:
Should I merge oe.dev to that "short lived" xorg-7.5 branch? (lots of
commits but better to resolve conflicts once there than in every
distribution tester wh
On 04-12-09 14:48, Martin Jansa wrote:
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 11:20 AM, git version control<
g...@git.openembedded.org> wrote:
Module: openembedded.git
Branch: org.openembedded.dev
Commit: ea85fd4e1fdb1f09fd21f65e077aab2f7ccdf65e
URL:
http://gitweb.openembedded.net/?p=openembedded.git&a=commit
John Buckley wrote:
> I would like to keep the build intact since it contains all the
> components and libraries I need. However, I would like to strip the
> XWindows boot-up so that only my Xwindow application runs for now so
> I can see if there are any significant performance improvements in my
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 11:20 AM, git version control <
g...@git.openembedded.org> wrote:
> Module: openembedded.git
> Branch: org.openembedded.dev
> Commit: ea85fd4e1fdb1f09fd21f65e077aab2f7ccdf65e
> URL:
> http://gitweb.openembedded.net/?p=openembedded.git&a=commit;h=ea85fd4e1fdb1f09fd21f65e077aa
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 11:12:36AM +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
> On 04-12-09 11:04, Martin Jansa wrote:
>
> >Should I merge oe.dev to that "short lived" xorg-7.5 branch? (lots of
> >commits but better to resolve conflicts once there than in every
> >distribution tester who merge that branch as shr do)
Koen Kooi wrote:
> Don't forget to remove the (R)PROVIDES in fso-apmd which are causing all
> the problems. Some comment as mickey, please use caps for vars.
I have pushed this now (using caps), to get angstrom fixed. I agree with
Phil that using "virtaul/apm" would be cleaner though, so I will be
Hello,
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> On 04-12-09 10:00, Martin Jansa wrote:
>>
>> I would like to create new file conf/distro/include/sane-providers.inc
>> where we could store all default providers.
>
> If it's the same for everyone, can't it be put in bitbake.conf? I'm grow
On 04-12-09 11:04, Martin Jansa wrote:
Should I merge oe.dev to that "short lived" xorg-7.5 branch? (lots of
commits but better to resolve conflicts once there than in every
distribution tester who merge that branch as shr do).
That'd be nice.
regards,
Koen
__
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 09:59:51AM +, Graeme Gregory wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 10:51:18 +0100
> Martin Jansa wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:44 AM, git version control <
> > g...@git.openembedded.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Module: openembedded.git
> > > Branch: org.openembedded.dev
> > >
On 04-12-09 10:00, Martin Jansa wrote:
I would like to create new file conf/distro/include/sane-providers.inc
where we could store all default providers.
If it's the same for everyone, can't it be put in bitbake.conf? I'm
growing a bit tired of mandatory sane-* files to include.
regards,
Ko
On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 10:51:18 +0100
Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:44 AM, git version control <
> g...@git.openembedded.org> wrote:
>
> > Module: openembedded.git
> > Branch: org.openembedded.dev
> > Commit: a0fb85891d24df07bd140f0b9f277e9ebb3768d7
> > URL:
> > http://gitweb.opene
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:44 AM, git version control <
g...@git.openembedded.org> wrote:
> Module: openembedded.git
> Branch: org.openembedded.dev
> Commit: a0fb85891d24df07bd140f0b9f277e9ebb3768d7
> URL:
> http://gitweb.openembedded.net/?p=openembedded.git&a=commit;h=a0fb85891d24df07bd140f0b9f277
On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 08:28 +0100, Sebastian Spaeth wrote:
> This is my take on solving our problem that we want a different "apm"
> provider. Koen outlined this solution, so this way I went.
>
> All recipes that RDPEND on "apm" basically get a
>
> DISTRO_apm ?= "apm"
> RDEPEND+= ${DISTRO_apm
I would like to create new file conf/distro/include/sane-providers.inc
where we could store all default providers.
Every distro should include this file and probably should drop own
PREFERRED_PROVIDERS if preferring same provider as sane-providers.inc.
I already prepared something, but not sure i
On 04-12-09 08:19, Sebastian Spaeth wrote:
* This allows distros to override the apm provider with an DISTRO_apm variable
* The change should be transparent and invisible for other distros
* This could also be done with a virtual/apm package, and a PREFERED_PROVIDER
set to apm
Don't forget to
FYI,
I had similar issues with opkg-cl (was linked with libldap of my
buildhost...[1]).
I thouht it was originated by bump to SRCREV to 413 but a rebuild from
scratch fixed all.
Please retry the hard way...
Regards
Andrea
[1] What I did was to unmerge openldap on my Gentoo buildhost. This
b
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Spaeth
---
conf/distro/shr.conf |2 +-
recipes/ipaq-sleep/ipaq-sleep_0.9.bb |5 +++--
recipes/openmoko2/neod_svn.bb |6 --
recipes/suspend-desktop/suspend-desktop_1.0.bb |5 +++--
recipes/tasks/task-
31 matches
Mail list logo
