-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02-06-10 12:48, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Martin Jansa wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 06:08:22AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >>> >>> since this is the first time i actually built an image with any of >>> the downloadable TI stuff, can i just sanity check what i did? it >>> seems to have worked, but i'd rather have someone else verify i did it >>> correctly. >>> >>> first step in downloading the contents into my dl dir: >>> >>> $ ls -l ti_* >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 rpjday rpjday 77373969 Jun 2 02:44 >>> ti_cgt_c6000_6.1.14_setup_linux_x86.bin >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 rpjday rpjday 77383796 Jun 1 18:45 >>> ti_cgt_c6000_6.1.9_setup_linux_x86.bin >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 rpjday rpjday 0 Jun 2 04:40 >>> ti_cgt_c6000_6.1.9_setup_linux_x86.bin.lock >>> $ >>> >>> it wasn't immediately clear whether or not i should grab the 6.1.14 >>> binary, but as there was a recipe for it, i took it, just in case. >>> >>> next, i failed to notice this in recipes/ti/ti-cgt6x.inc: >>> >>> SRC_URI = >>> "http://install.source.dir.local/ti_cgt_c6000_${PVwithdots}_setup_linux_x86.bin;name=cgt6xbin"; >>> >>> obviously, the local fetch is going to fail because of that URL, so >>> i just changed it to: >>> >>> SRC_URI = >>> "file://${DL_DIR}/ti_cgt_c6000_${PVwithdots}_setup_linux_x86.bin;name=cgt6xbin" >>> >>> i would think that either a comment can be added so that users know >>> to do that, or why not just change that line? actually, it can be >>> tightened up a bit more, in that this: >>> >>> SRC_URI = >>> "file://${DL_DIR}/ti_cgt_c6000_${PVwithdots}_setup_linux_x86.bin;name=cgt6xbin" >>> BINFILE="ti_cgt_c6000_${PVwithdots}_setup_linux_x86.bin" >>> >>> could be replaced with this, could it not? >>> >>> BINFILE="ti_cgt_c6000_${PVwithdots}_setup_linux_x86.bin" >>> SRC_URI = "file://${DL_DIR}/${BINFILE};name=cgt6xbin" >>> >>> just seems cleaner to avoid the duplication. >> >> Without testing it myself, here is what I expect: >> >> You don't have to change this if you download it to ${DL_DIR} yourself >> as asked in recipe. >> >> If there is archive already in download dir, bitbake won't try to >> download it from http link and will use that already downloaded archive >> and check it's checksums (which is good especially as you can download a >> bit different archive when downloading manually). >> >> After replacing it with file:// it won't be checked. >> >> Only one part I'm not so sure about is that all my downloads in DL_DIR >> has also file.md5 (ie ti_cgt_c6000_6.1.9_setup_linux_x86.bin.md5), you >> can easily create it with md5sum, but IIRC I've seen (at least with some >> bitbake version) that downloaded archive was ignored when it didn't have >> .md5 neighbour. If that's the case, then the recipe download >> instrcutions should be improved. > > yup, that's the issue i must have been having. with the original > recipe file, i was getting a fetch error, but i overlooked creating > the .md5 checksum file. i can throw together a patch to clarify that > in the recipe file unless you've already done it.
There's a readme in the same dir: http://gitorious.org/angstrom/openembedded/blobs/org.openembedded.dev/recipes/ti/README -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFMBjs1MkyGM64RGpERArueAJ42jrY5fdBX7cObXK97q+2j/sNFUgCeO+0D 4p+v7XNYjqRw8GlFSj8N+30= =D5vI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Angstrom-distro-devel mailing list Angstrom-distro-devel@linuxtogo.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/angstrom-distro-devel
