On Sun, 2013-11-03 at 23:16 +0100, Andrea Adami wrote: > On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Eric Bénard <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Richard, > > > > Le Wed, 30 Oct 2013 15:15:12 +0000, > > Richard Purdie <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > >> On Tue, 2013-10-29 at 08:28 +0100, Eric Bénard wrote: > >> > Hi Khem, > >> > > >> > Le Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:45:21 -0700, > >> > Khem Raj <[email protected]> a écrit : > >> > > >> > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Eric Bénard <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > Hi Richard, > >> > > > > >> > > > I saw your patch fixing FILESPATH's and Kergoth's one fixing > >> > > > PACKAGECONFIG processing order and I think I'm also facing an order > >> > > > problem when SRC_URI is computed. > >> > > > > >> > > > So when building SRC_URI when two layers have bbappend which apply > >> > > > patches : the SRC_URI seems to be built using an order I fail to > >> > > > understand somewhere instead of priority or the overrides' order. > >> > > > > >> > > > The use case is a System on Module and its custom motherboard : > >> > > > - meta-fsl-arm : > >> > > > * linux-imx_xyz.bb : > >> > > > SRC_URI = "patchgeneric1 ..." > >> > > > > >> > > > - meta-som-support : > >> > > > * conf/machine/mysom.conf > >> > > > > >> > > > * linux-imx_xyz.bbappend : > >> > > > SRC_URI_append_mysom = "patchsom1 patchsom2 ..." > >> > > > > >> > > > - meta-custommotherboard (SOM + Cunstom Motherboard) : > >> > > > * conf/machine/myproduct.conf > >> > > > MACHINEOVERRIDES_prepend = "mysom:" > >> > > > include conf/machine/mysom.conf > >> > > > > >> > > > * linux-imx_xyz.bbappend : > >> > > > SRC_URI_append_myproduct = "patchproduct1 patchproduct2 ..." > >> > > > > >> > > > in the end I get : > >> > > > SRC_URI = "patchgeneric1 ... patchsoc1 ... patchproduct1 ... > >> > > > patchsom1 ..." > >> > > > > >> > > > and of course as patchproduct* are supposed to apply on top of > >> > > > patchsoc* the patch fail to apply. > >> > > > > >> > > > I didn't found a way to build SRC_URI in the order I would like (I > >> > > > tested : changing MACHINEOVERRIDES 's order, changing layers' > >> > > > priority, > >> > > > changing machine's name to see if that was an alphabetical order > >> > > > ...). > >> > > > > >> > > > In the end the only thing which worked was to add an (empty by > >> > > > default) > >> > > > variable in som's SRC_URI and filling this variables from the > >> > > > custommotherboard's bbappend. > >> > > > > >> > > > Is the behaviour I'm seeing expected or is there something wrong in > >> > > > my > >> > > > setup ? > >> > > > >> > > what is your OVERRIDES order. > >> > > > >> > "${TARGET_OS}:${TRANSLATED_TARGET_ARCH}:build-${BUILD_OS}:pn-${PN}:${MACHINEOVERRIDES}:${DISTROOVERRIDES}:${CLASSOVERRIDE}:forcevariable" > >> > > >> > so it follows the MACHINEOVERRIDES order (and I tried both append and > >> > prepend to hack MACHINEOVERRIDES without any behaviour change). > >> > >> I think what Khem is asking is what OVERRIDES expands to? > >> > >> You mean patchso* and not patchsoc* above, right? Or should patchsom1 be > >> patchsoc2? > >> > > oops : > > I expect SRC_URI = "patchgeneric1 ... patchsom1 ... patchproduct1 ..." > > and I get : > > SRC_URI = "patchgeneric1 ... patchproduct1 ... patchsom1 ..." > > > >> Its hard to follow and it might be easier if you could share a > >> simplified test case we could reproduce this with. I don't doubt there > >> is an issue in there but we need a way to reproduce and debug this. > >> > > OK, I'm preparing a simple testcase to reproduce that with oe-core + > > meta-fsl-arm + meta-som + meta-baseboard. > > > > Eric > > _______________________________________________ > > Openembedded-core mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > > > I have to report an undesiderate behavior: > > the formfactor files in our .bbappend are not considered :/ > DEBUG: Searching for machconfig in paths:.... > /oe/oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/formfactor/formfactor-0.0/ > /oe/oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/formfactor/formfactor/ > /oe/oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/formfactor/files/ > /oe/meta-handheld/recipes-bsp/formfactor/files/poodle > > so we end up with the empty machconfig of > /oe/oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/formfactor/files/ > > Surely this didn't happen when we tested the recipe.
With which revision of OE-Core? Was this with the dora release tag, current dora head or master? Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
