Hi again,
sorry for the noise but did some investigations and was able to
reproduce....
On 2021-07-06 15:42, Peter Bergin wrote:
Hi,
On 2021-07-06 04:44, Anuj Mittal wrote:
Hi Peter,
On Sun, 2021-07-04 at 10:21 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Sun, 2021-07-04 at 10:59 +0200, Peter Bergin wrote:
On 2021-07-03 16:55, Mittal, Anuj wrote:
On Fri, 2021-07-02 at 13:59 +0200, Peter Bergin wrote:
This reverts commit 10aa1291979fb90bed1beb49be4d406ed0e1e4d5.
As there is no build dependency between libubootenv and the
configuration
of u-boot there is no reason to check for UBOOT_CONFIG or
UBOOT_MACHINE
by adding the class uboot-config. Revert this in order to
remove
useless
workaround in bsp layer (meta-freescale).
This was added to address failures in world builds:
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/141757
If this is not required, then I think we'd need to address those
failures.
Thanks for the pointer about the reason for this patch. I searched
a bit
but could not find it.
Can you please help me define 'world builds'?
"bitbake world"
i.e. build everything
By reading the mail thread my thoughts are that the obvious thing
is
that the build has a bad configuration as u-boot is skipped. This
should
be the thing to solve.
Not every MACHINE will support u-boot or have a configuration for it.
Do you have a fix for this? This patch was applied and now the world
builds for MACHINEs not supporting u-boot are failing. Do you mind if I
send a revert of your patch?
I don't mind but I think it is the wrong thing to do, at least without
analyzing the failing builds and get to the root of the problem.
My view on this, correct me if I'm wrong here. If you just want to
build libubootenv you should be able to do it for any machine, with or
without u-boot support as there is no build dependency between
libubootenv and u-boot. If you have libubootenv in your image there
will be a RRECOMMENDS to u-boot-env and in that case you must have
NO_RECOMMENDATION=0 or a valid u-boot configuration. If the world
build is failing I guess there is a configuration for a target without
u-boot that includes libubootenv in an image. Or what is the exact
failure? Can you send a reference with a log to the failing build?
/Peter
$ bitbake libubootenv
Loading cache: 100%
|######################################################################################################|
Time: 0:00:00
Loaded 3462 entries from dependency cache.
NOTE: Resolving any missing task queue dependencies
ERROR: Nothing RPROVIDES 'u-boot-default-env' (but
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/libubootenv_0.3.1.bb RDEPENDS on or otherwise
requires it)
NOTE: Runtime target 'u-boot-default-env' is unbuildable, removing...
Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['u-boot-default-env']
ERROR: Required build target 'libubootenv' has no buildable providers.
Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['libubootenv',
'u-boot-default-env']
Summary: There was 1 WARNING message shown.
Summary: There were 2 ERROR messages shown, returning a non-zero
exit code.
The setup above was to use a machine from (meta-intel) with grub as
bootloader.
Then I can correct my earlier statement and a new wisdom that run-time
dependecies are scanned already in the early phases. Apparently it is
not possible to build libubootenv due to RRECOMMENDS to
u-boot-default-env. The build for a 'non-u-boot config' will fail if we
add 'inherit uboot-config' and it will fail without. What is the
difference for a 'world' build?
/Peter
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#153614):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/153614
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/83938334/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
