> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Marcin Juszkiewicz > Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 4:01 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [oe] any ETA on a working dev beagleboard demo image? > > Dnia niedziela, 15 listopada 2009 o 15:56:36 Robert P. J. Day napisał(a): > > > yes, i know i'm sounding like a broken record, but i have an invite > > to give a short local demo of the beagleboard this tuesday and i'd > > like to do it with an angstrom development demo image, just because i > > prefer to live out there on the edge. > > You can always move back to some revision before recent changes happened, > you > can use Angstrom narcissus to generate working image. I can confirm that beagleboard-demo-image builds successfully on both the DEV and the Stable branches using Ubuntu 9.10 x64. My last build was based on SHA1 ID: 916ed3c > > > at the moment, there is just the one package standing in the way -- > > guile-native -- and as i recall, someone posted what looked like a > > manual fix. is that being turned into a patch at any point? > > Did you tried to make it a patch? Patches are always welcome. > > > i realize i'm nagging, but it's literally been *weeks* since that > > particular bitbake target actually built, and every time it looks like > > it's getting close to being buildable, more packages break. > > Maybe start tagging your copy of OE to know which version was buildable for > you? It will make life easier to make 'git bisect' to find out what broke it. > > > i appreciate that development means exactly that but, at the very > > least, even the development branch should *build*, even if there are > > run issues. > > No, it is not 'org.openembedded.always-building' branch. This is development > branch where everything can happen. At OEDEM it was decided that many core > changes will be made and we accepted some breakage during that time. We are > working on making it buildable again but testing takes time. > > > p.s. perhaps it would be useful to start tagging the development > > branch at points where it builds, just so someone can always retreat > > to the most recent known good build. > > "where it builds" is not a definition. For me one revision builds for > at91sam9263ek/x11-image target but not for progear/xfce-image for example. Or > build on my Debian system but breaks in Ubuntu 9.04 virtual. There is no such > thing as 'it builds for everyone' and you should know that from your xterm-207 > problem which was not a problem for me (as it was building under my Debian and > I do not have a client who would use Fedora for builds). > > > or perhaps start a branch named, oh, "bleeding", which, when it builds > > properly, can be merged back into development. whatever. but it > > strikes me that it's overwhelmingly pointless to have a development > > branch that doesn't build since that gives no one the opportunity to > > actually test it. > > There is a tag on .dev branch which marks moment before OE core changes > landed: "pre-nov2009-core-updates" - maybe checkout that version and just > cherry-pick those updates which are needed to make OE buildable for you? > > Regards, > -- > JID: [email protected] > Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/ > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
