On 09/13/2013 06:29 AM, Hans Beckérus wrote:
Hmm. Now suddenly I got an error on my current world build of
util-linux-native package. Is this something that is a known issue?
Provided that the sysroot is correct (which I assume) this is because
of the local version of udev on my build host. So, is this perhaps one
of the reasons why some hosts distros are not certified in eg. Yocto?
What is your host and host OS in this case?
Sau!
| In file included from misc-utils/lsblk.c:46:0:
| /usr/include/libudev.h:28:2: error: #error "#define
LIBUDEV_I_KNOW_THE_API_IS_SUBJECT_TO_CHANGE is needed to use this
experimental library version"
| In file included from misc-utils/findmnt.c:36:0:
| /usr/include/libudev.h:28:2: error: #error "#define
LIBUDEV_I_KNOW_THE_API_IS_SUBJECT_TO_CHANGE is needed to use this
experimental library version"
Have not see this before.
| misc-utils/lsblk.c: In function 'get_udev_properties':
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:426:2: warning: implicit declaration of function
'udev_device_new_from_subsystem_sysname'
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:426:2: warning: nested extern declaration of
'udev_device_new_from_subsystem_sysname' [-Wnested-externs]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:426:6: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:430:3: warning: implicit declaration of function
'udev_device_get_property_value' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:430:3: warning: nested extern declaration of
'udev_device_get_property_value' [-Wnested-externs]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:430:13: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:434:13: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:438:13: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:442:13: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:444:13: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:446:13: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/lsblk.c:448:13: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| make[2]: *** [misc-utils/lsblk-lsblk.o] Error 1
| make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
| misc-utils/findmnt.c: In function 'get_tag_from_udev':
| misc-utils/findmnt.c:386:2: warning: implicit declaration of
function 'udev_device_new_from_subsystem_sysname'
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
| misc-utils/findmnt.c:386:2: warning: nested extern declaration of
'udev_device_new_from_subsystem_sysname' [-Wnested-externs]
| misc-utils/findmnt.c:386:6: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/findmnt.c:394:3: warning: implicit declaration of
function 'udev_device_get_property_value'
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
| misc-utils/findmnt.c:394:3: warning: nested extern declaration of
'udev_device_get_property_value' [-Wnested-externs]
| misc-utils/findmnt.c:394:8: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/findmnt.c:397:8: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/findmnt.c:400:8: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| misc-utils/findmnt.c:403:8: warning: assignment makes pointer from
integer without a cast [enabled by default]
| make[2]: *** [misc-utils/findmnt-findmnt.o] Error 1
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Hans Beckérus <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Richard Purdie
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 14:14 +0200, Hans Beckérus wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Hans Beckérus <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Hans Beckérus <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Hans Beckérus <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Richard Purdie
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 10:06 +0200, Hans Beckérus wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Hans Beckerus <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2013-09-12 11:09, Hans Beckerus wrote:
On 2013-09-12 8:02, Hans Beckérus wrote:
I now got a somewhat better picture of what is going on. I know what is
failing, and why. But currently I have no solution ready. Actually there are
some nasty traps to get caught in here :(. The problem is actually as simple
as it is obvious. For all those native packages that do work (this is a
unique problem for native packages using libtool), they all seem to share a
common thing in their recipes:
EXTRA_OECONF += " --with-libtool-sysroot=${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}"
Great! This is the way to do it. But, what if someone forgets to do this?
Well the answer is; it will most likely *not* compile!
Since libtool now has been fixed to correctly pick up the sysroot from the
compiler (using --print-sysroot) if --with-libtool-sysroot is not specified
it will try to execute ${CC} --print-sysroot. Bummer! ${CC} is most likely
simply set to 'gcc' for native packages. That is, the local host compiler is
used.
The sysroot for that is of course "/". And it should be. Otherwise it will
bring in the wrong set of header files and libraries. But, there is another
problem here. We should not let libtool use "/"! Because even if we use the
local host compiler for native packages, we still use the oe-core upstream
version of libtool, and that does not like using "/" as sysroot. If it does
everything becomes a mess. And that is exactly what seems to happen now
after the patch. Before the patch libtool rendered the SDK for libtool
enabled packages more or less useless. But, it also saved us in the native
case. Because if --with-libtool-sysroot was set, the path was used directly,
but if it was not set, lt_sysroot was also kept unset. And here is the
spooky part again. Having lt_sysroot set to nothing seems to work just as
well as setting it, provided it points to a valid location!? This magic
however did not work for the SDK which requires the sysroot to be resolved
correctly when not specified. So one conclusion could be that, for native
packages, enforcement of --with-libtool-sysroot is a possible way forward.
Would this be safe? I think so, but I might have overlooked something. I
can also see in config.log that "configure" is fed with a lot of arguments,
even if EXTRA_OECONF is not specified. How is this handled? How can I try to
force this in for all native packages. I looked into native.bbclass but it
was not obvious to me how anything in there actually ends up in arguments to
"configure". Any hints? There are still a lot of gaps in my analysis ;) If
anyone feels like they can fill in the gaps, please do.
Now this is getting interesting. When I said before I could reproduce
the problem in a world build I did not know that it would actually
succeed later. On a different build server!! The previous analysis
made is mostly true. But there is something more. Why did it succeed
on one of my servers but not the other one? The way to find out was to
compare what lt_sysroot is resolved to in both cases. And there it
was. On the machine for which it works, lt_sysroot is now picked up
from $CC --print-sysroot (due to the patch), but the result is not
"/", it is unset! Which is the same behavior that can be observed
without the libtool patch. So this is getting even worse now. It is
gcc and host dependent. If gcc has been built with a sysroot of "/" is
does not work since that will be picked up by libtool, and is of
course wrong in our case. But if lt_sysroot is kept unset, libtool
seems to be able to resolve a working default using some other
(unknown) mechanism. That is why we have not seen this problem before,
even though libtool actually did the wrong thing before the patch. So
this leaves me with at least this question; is it actually correct
that gcc has "/" as a compiled in sysroot on some machines?
I then saw two possible solutions:
a) update the patch in libtool and if gcc reports a single "/", skip
it and leave lt_sysroot unset.
b) consistency is the key. Let all native packages force setting of a
proper lt_sysroot using --with-libtool-sysroot.
This is also when I found this in autotools.bbclass
def append_libtool_sysroot(d):
# Only supply libtool sysroot option for non-native packages
if not bb.data.inherits_class('native', d):
return '--with-libtool-sysroot=${STAGING_DIR_HOST}'
return ""
I can somewhat understand the rationale behind this. If building for
target you wish to point libtool to a proper sysroot, and leaving it
unset for native seems like a good idea. But I do not think that
really is the case. Even for native builds you wish to point it to the
sysroot for the libtool actually being used. Not to what the compiler
is pointing to, which is now the effect after applying the libtool
patch. But which is actually what you want when building from an
placement independent SDK toolchain for which $CC is updated with a
proper --sysroot argument to gcc automatically when the environment
script is sourced.
So my propasal now is to update autotools.bbclass and for native
packages set -with-libtool-sysroot=${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}. This should
cover all the corner cases and work in all different combinations.
Again, consistency is the key. But I still need to try it. Problem now
is that I need to wait until I have access to the machine for which it
currently does not work to verify it properly.
Please advise. Does anyone object strongly to this idea?
Sadly its not the right thing to do. The purpose of a sysroot option is
to say "compile and link against things in this subdirectory, do not
look outside it". Our native binaries need to use the system libc and
headers. They are therefore expected to look outside STAGING_DIR_NATIVE
if they don't find what they need in there. Native is really a special
hybrid case.
Ok. Now I am with you :) Had to get some food and give this a second
thought and I definitely agree.
Patching autotools.bbclass is not the right thing to do. Most likely a
package wish to use the same sysroot as the compiler, but sometimes it
does not. The "sometimes" here is the troll! Looking at the libtool
package itself you can see that it is setting
-with-libtool-sysroot=${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}. But that is for that
package. Does not mean all of them wish to have it like that. The real
bug here (the second one) seems to be that libtool internals does not
handle a sysroot of "/" very well. It works fine if sysroot is
undefined unless you really wish to point it to somewhere special,
like in the case of the SDK for which you always wish to point it to
the sysroot of the compiler and which is never going to be "/".
I think, and I am up for other suggestions here, that the only sane
fix (or workaround) is to trigger on the "/" and unset lt_sysroot and
thus behave as it did before the patch was applied. This fix should go
into libtool.m4. I can so far see no danger in doing this and should
be bug-compatible with previous behavior. Also it will make sure the
SDK works placement independent which was not the case before the
patch was applied.
Thanks
Hans
.
Here I am not with you really. Yes, the sysroot purpose is exactly what you say.
But, the sysroot for libtool *is* different. It has nothing to do
really with what gcc is using, it just happens to be the same on
standard systems. The purpose of the libtool sysroot is to point to
libtools own sysroot, and this might not actually be the same as the
compiler sysroot. As in our case. Since for native packages, gcc and
libtool are executed in different context, libtool *must* point to its
proper location for which it was built and that is STAGING_DIR_NATIVE.
So things should be working if "/" is specified as the sysroot, or its
not specified at all. I think there are deeper bugs in libtool we're
uncovering :(
When I first saw the patch, it looked like the correct thing to be doing
but it now seems it may uncover further bugs which are going to need to
get fixed before we can take this patch :(.
I am testing this second patch now in a world build and so far
everything looks good.
Btw, what about the first alternative? Patching "/" to nothing in
libtool. Having lt_sysroot unset seems to work ok.
I agree that patching autotools.bbclass might be wrong. It seems my
patch in libtool only cause problems if gcc return sysroot as "/", not
when it return nothing.
Guys, I need your feedback on this. Is it worth trying this out and
testing a world build or should I simply drop it?
I have a new patch in libtool.m4 that now unsets lt_sysroot if $CC
-print-sysroot returns "/". But I am in some sense confused here since
on my bigger machine (for which gcc sets nothing) forcing it to return
"/" and let lt_sysroot become=/ still works! So this also seems to be
very host dependent. I need to try this out on the machine that I
could really reproduce the build errors on.
"/" and no sysroot should behave exactly the same. If they do not, that
is a bug in libtool's code. I'd be fine with a check which unsets it in
that case though. It masks another issue but we have to take these one
at a time. I do believe this problem worth digging into. Whether we can
get the fix in for the 1.5 release I'm not sure but we will want to
address it in 1.6 regardless.
Agree. Since all my patch did initially was to make sure gcc was
queried when --with-libtool-sysroot was not specified this is the only
possible reason I can think of that causes it to break like this. And
there is only one side on this coin. The result before the patch if a
sysroot *was* specified is the same now also after the patch. I will
get back later with a status update on my world build. Will probably
take all weekend since it is a simple dual-core ARM mini-server :(
I am not really concerned about what release this is targeting. I
consider this a workaround until I can dig deeper into what is
actually going wrong. My primary goal is to make sure that the SDK
does not break as it did before when installed in different paths. Of
course that must not affect legacy features so hopefully this
workaround eliminates that.
Thanks.
Hans
Cheers,
Richard
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
