On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 18:58 -0400, Michael Smith wrote: > I've been playing around with this and it seems to be creating some > problems, unless it's just finding problems in my overlay that the old > code didn't see. > > With the latest fix, it finds dependency loops, but I'm not sure how to > track them down as the dependencies are identified only by numbers:
Thanks for testing. It is actually telling you the problem and decoding the information: > Dependency loop #1 found: > Task 7 > (/home/michael/startitup/public/recipes/images/toastix-image.bb, > do_install) (depends: set([9, 6])) > Task 8 > (/home/michael/startitup/public/recipes/images/toastix-image.bb, > do_populate_staging) (depends: set([7])) > Task 9 > (/home/michael/startitup/public/recipes/images/toastix-image.bb, > do_rootfs) (depends: set([1024, 6, 2049, 8, 2057, 2059, 13, 791, 2067, > 21, 23, 2077, 31, 33, 2087, 41, 43, 2097, 51, 53, 2107, So task 7 depends on task 9 which depends on task 8 which depends on task 7. Its lists what tasks 7, 8 and 9 are. Is it just this image recipe thats causing problems or are there others? Can you point me at a copy of the recipe? > Before the fix from 502bd2e, it was dropping some do_package_write_deb > dependencies that are needed to ensure .debs are built for packages that > are not listed in IMAGE_INSTALL, but are required by other packages. My > task-depends.dot was missing about 1000 entries. So was my depends.dot. Yes, without the fix it would do that. > BTW, is there any chance of getting Bitbake officially moved to a Git > repo? I think a few people are working out of git-svn trees, or subdirs > inside larger git trees, but it takes some gymnastics to merge between > them as Git doesn't know they're related. As Chris replied, he's looking at this. I admit I'd like to see bitbake moved to git. Cheers, Richard -- Richard Purdie Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Bitbake-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bitbake-dev
