On 04/11/2014 09:56 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
Hello,
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Robert Yang <liezhi.y...@windriver.com> wrote:
On 04/07/2014 10:55 PM, Valentin Popa wrote:
Indeed the build failure was introduced by that patch, which enters a
logical
conflict with the bbappend file for mesa.
To remain compatible with the future releases I suggest to not remove/add
flags
from/to EXTRA_OECONF explicitly, and make use of what PACKAGECONFIG
contains.
The first part of the __anonymous function from the bbappend file can be
simply
replaced with:
PACKAGECONFIG_remove = "egl"
and the second part with:
PROVIDES_remove = "virtual/libgles1 virtual/libgles2 virtual/egl"
and
PROVIDES_remove = "virtual/libgl" if mx6 is in SOC_FAMILY.
Hi Otavio,
Does Valentin's suggestions work for you, please?
I am traveling and won't be able to test it.
However I am quite surprise this didn't come out /before/ when the
dora updates were in test in AB since meta-fsl-arm is tested in AB
too. We need to figure /why/ this broke and for now I think we ought
to revert this dora patch.
This kind of change needs to be coordinated and raise a build break in
an Yocto Project is unacceptable IMO.
For me it is clear this didn't run in AB before merging. :(
I'm sorry about that, I had run it on my *local* AB before merging, but
the local AB is less powerful and doesn't include the meta-fsl-arm layer,
I'm fine to revert it, what's RP and valentin's opinion, please ?
// Robert
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
