On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 12:47 AM Alejandro Hernandez <aeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Khem,
>
> On Sun, 15 Jan 2023 at 11:44, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc | 10 ++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc
>> b/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc
>> index 98acf0a222..2b38aeb62d 100644
>> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc
>> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc
>> @@ -140,6 +140,16 @@ export CC_FOR_BUILD = "LD_LIBRARY_PATH= ${BUILD_CC}"
>>
>> MULTIARCH := "${@bb.utils.contains("DISTRO_FEATURES", "multiarch", "yes",
>> "no", d)}"
>> do_configure[vardeps] += "MULTIARCH"
>> +
>> +addtask do_prepare_sources after do_patch before do_configure
>> +
>> +# Remove gdb and supporting source directories, they are detected by
>> +# configure otherwise and demands additional gdb deps e.g. gmp, mpc, mpfr
>> +do_prepare_sources () {
>> + rm -rf ${S}/gdb ${S}/gdbserver ${S}/gdbsupport ${S}/gnulib \
>> + ${S}/libbacktrace ${S}/libdecnumber ${S}/readline ${S}/sim
>> +}
>> +
>
>
> This seems to have been fixed upstream, I wonder if its better to backport
> that patch to 2.40 so it aligns properly with the --disable-gdb flag we are
> passing:
> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff;h=5fb0e308577143ceb313fde5538dc9ecb038f29f
>
Thanks yes its better to backport it, I will add it to v2.
> Cheers,
>
> Alejandro
>>
>> do_configure () {
>> (cd ${S} && gnu-configize)
>>
>> --
>> 2.39.0
>>
>>
>>
>>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#176080):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/176080
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/96291245/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
