Dnia piątek, 30 lipca 2010 o 11:07:32 Frans Meulenbroeks napisał(a): > > More interesting to me would be an algorithm more like. > > > > while recipe in recips/*.bb; do > > rm -rf tmp/ ; bitbake recipe > > done > > > > with the test noting if the fail is due to a blacklisted dependency, a > > totally missing dependency (recipe been deleted sometime in past) or an > > actual compile fail due to a missing DEPENDS entry somewhere in the tree. > > > > But this is going to burn CPU time like never before.
> Definitely an interesting test. Actually with packaged staging this might > become manageble. > I would not mind running such a test, even if it takes a week or so. I did such ones for Poky and with packaged staging dir outside of tmpdir it works very good. Most of time is spent on removing tmp and repopulating it from packages. > I guess it is hard to do this for older versions of recipes though. > afaik bitbake -b will not build things one depends on and bitbake recipe > will take either the pinned version or otherwise the last one a > non-negative DEFAULT_PREFERENCE. "bitbake recipe-version" works but you will need more work to get 'version' part as it can contain SRCREV etc. 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
