On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Richard Purdie < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 10:50 -0400, Joe MacDonald wrote: > > Adding the oe-core list back to the cc list since I accidentally > > dropped the list on my first response. > > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Richard Purdie > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 10:15 -0400, Joe MacDonald wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Richard Purdie > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 09:56 -0400, [email protected] > > wrote: > > > > From: Joe MacDonald <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Building bdwgc-native on systems with older > > versions of > > > autoconf (earlier > > > > than 2.69) is known to have issues: > > > > > > > > https://github.com/ivmai/bdwgc/issues/16 > > > > > > > > An option is to simply mask the errors with > > > m4_pattern_allow(...) for each > > > > of the macros, but rerunning autoreconf produces a > > > functional configure > > > > script that builds a functional native version of > > bdwgc. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joe MacDonald <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > meta/recipes-support/bdwgc/bdwgc_7.2d.bb | 9 > > +++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > I tripped over this yesterday on one of my older > > builders. > > > It happens to still > > > > be Ubuntu 12.04.2. I don't know if it's unique to > > my > > > configuration, but after > > > > doing some digging around on the web I can't see > > any obvious > > > indications that > > > > I'm missing any autotools package and the general > > consensus > > > seems to be that > > > > autoreconf is the best option when the failures > > are > > > relatively beign as they > > > > are here. > > > > > > > > -J. > > > > > > > > diff --git > > a/meta/recipes-support/bdwgc/bdwgc_7.2d.bb > > > b/meta/recipes-support/bdwgc/bdwgc_7.2d.bb > > > > index 46e5257..d8e2de5 100644 > > > > --- a/meta/recipes-support/bdwgc/bdwgc_7.2d.bb > > > > +++ b/meta/recipes-support/bdwgc/bdwgc_7.2d.bb > > > > @@ -36,3 +36,12 @@ ARM_INSTRUCTION_SET = "arm" > > > > > > > > inherit autotools > > > > BBCLASSEXTEND = "native nativesdk" > > > > + > > > > +do_configure_prepend() { > > > > + # Without this, on older installations of > > autoconf > > > errors crop up during configure: > > > > + # | configure.ac:70: error: possibly > > undefined macro: > > > AC_MSG_ERROR > > > > + # | If this token and others are > > legitimate, > > > please use m4_pattern_allow. > > > > + # | See the Autoconf documentation. > > > > + # | configure.ac:358: error: possibly > > undefined macro: > > > AS_IF > > > > + ( cd ${S}; autoreconf -i ) > > > > +} > > > > > > > > > This is timely since we're seeing this issue on some > > of the > > > autobuilders. We should be autoreconfing by default > > though, > > > any idea why > > > it doesn't in this case? > > > > > > > > > No, I didn't actually dig into that, I didn't realize it > > should be > > > autoreconfing. Is it explciit in the do_configure step, or > > implicit? > > > Maybe it's a timestamp issue or something? The only > > machine I've got > > > left that has this problem is pretty fast, so maybe on a > > slower (or > > > more heavily loaded) machine an implicit rule will fire > > where a beefy, > > > unloaded one won't? Just a wild guess. > > > > > > Reading the link you supplied further, it could be a missing > > pkgconfig > > dependency? > > > > > > I thought so at first, but I couldn't find anything absent on my > > builder that looked even remotely pkgconfig-related. Then I started > > digging into the autotools stuff, since the warning is clearly about > > expanding autoconf macros and that's when I finally started paying > > attention to the version numbers on the failing host versus the > > builders I use that weren't complaining. > > > > > > It could still be that there's something missing, but when I noticed > > the comment just below the "closed" bar in the issue I linked: > > > > > > ivmai commented10 months ago > > I have tested the git sources from bdwgc and they only configure > > properly with autoconf >= 2.69. [...] > > It seemed like I'd found at least confirmation that what I was seeing > > was expected. > > > > > > I have no idea why the autotools.bbclass' autoreconf wouldn't do it, > > though. I'll go have a quick look to see if the tree is different > > because I also passed it -i when I did the autoreconf. > > > > I have a reproducer: > > bitbake bdwgc-native pkgconfig-native -c clean; bitbake bdwgc-native > > Pretty sure its a missing pkgconfig dependency. > Confirmed on the failing machine here too. You've got this, then? Or do you want me to send a new patch? -- Joe MacDonald :wq
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
