On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 14:35 +0800, Robert Yang wrote: > Hi experts, > > There is a bug 1169: eglibc doesn't depend on gcc version correctly, > > The produce steps are: > > 1) In the first build dir(e.g, build_1), edit conf/local.conf: > SSTATE_DIR = /path/to/share_sstate > > $ bitbake meta-toolchain > > 2) In the second build dir(e.g, build_2), edit local.conf: > SSTATE_DIR = /path/to/share_sstate > SDKGCCVERSION="4.5.1" > GCCVERSION="4.5.1" > > $ bitbake meta-toolchain > > Then we will notice the error: > | error: Failed dependencies: > | libgcc1 >= 4.6.0 is needed by eglibc-utils-2.13-r1+svnr14157.armv5te > > The reason is a little complicated: > As we can see that eglibc's RDPENDS should have 'libgcc', but eglibc's > DEPENDS(not RDEPENDS) can't have libgcc, otherwise there would be loop > dependencies(since libgcc already DEPENDS on eglibc), this causes > eglibc.do_package can't detect that the version of libgcc or gcc > has been changed from 4.6 to 4.5.1, so it would mirror the > sstate-eglibc-xxx_package.tgz(which is stored by gcc 4.6) from the > SSTATE_DIR, and then it would do_package_write_rpm from the data > of sstate-eglibc-xxx_package.tgz, but the objdump can find that the > binary file depends on the special version of libgcc, and it would > write the data( libgcc1 >= 4.6.0) to eglibc.spec, but the current > version of libgcc is 4.5.1, so there would be dependencies error when > do_rootfs. > > I don't know how to fix this, maybe we should not mirror the tarball of > sstate-xxx_package.tgz(which is mirrored according to the DEPENDS) from the > SSTATE_DIR, but only mirror the tarball of sstate-xxx_deploy-rpm.tgz(which > is mirrored according to the RDEPENDS, the RDEPENDS is what the binary > rpm package really cares), the similar to ipk and deb.
The sstate checksum of the sstate-eglibc-xxx_package.tgz package should have changed when the gcc version changed, such that it would repackage (based on updated data). I think the problem is that in the sstate code, we've assumed the toolchain is special and can change: BB_HASHTASK_WHITELIST ?= "(.*-cross$|.*-native$|.*-cross-initial$|.*-cross-intermediate$|^virtual:native:.*|^virtual:nativesdk:.*)" and this may be a sign we should reconsider this. Alternatively we could hiighlight we simply don't support gcc version going backwards... Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
