On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 17:42 +0100, Burton, Ross wrote: > On 7 September 2012 17:32, Mark Hatle <mark.ha...@windriver.com> wrote: > > I'm curious, is there any [easy] way we can force a rerun of configure as a > > test pass over the system? > > > > I'd like a way to verify that both this patch works as expected, and future > > recipes work as expected. (It would also be nice to test the things that > > don't use the autotools.bbclass..) > > Yeah, I expect we'll discover some cases when upstream just don't > expect a distclean. By generally taking from git and re-running the > entire autotools we *should* be okay, but...
Further testing suggests we either going to need a whitelist or a blacklist for this :/ The key places people get bitten are eglibc and gcc so those should be straight forward to test, the question is how widely to deploy this initially. I think the mechanism is good, its now just a question of the implementation detail. FWIW, libgpg-error fails with checksum issues (checksumming a generated file?!) and libtool has issues about cleaning directories that have makefiles that were never generated... Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core