[yocto] Yocto weekly bug trend charts -- WW13
Hi all, This is the weekly bug trend for WW13. The new submitted vs. fixed bug number is 45 vs. 66. By comparing with WW12, open bug number for Major, Normal increased a lot. WDD number and Open Bug number are 866 and 174. Bug status of WW13 could be found on https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Bug_Trend. Best Regards, Jiajun ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
[yocto] [PATCH 0/1][Resend] meta-yocto fix
The patch is to change local.conf to allow Hob change BB threads and pmake. Please review. In the current local.conf, BB_NUMBER_THREADS and PARALLEL_MAKE are assigned by '=', which overwrites the values set from the Hob. To avoid that, use '?=' instead. The following changes since commit 8691a588267472eb5a32b978a0eb9ddfd0c91733: cross-canadian.bbclass: fix rpath for sdk executables (2012-03-31 18:00:59 +0100) are available in the git repository at: git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib shane/meta-yocto http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=shane/meta-yocto Shane Wang (1): meta-yocto/local.conf.sample: change = to ?= for BB_NUMBER_THREADS and PARALLEL_MAKE meta-yocto/conf/local.conf.sample |4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) -- 1.7.6 ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
[yocto] [PATCH 1/1] meta-yocto/local.conf.sample: change = to ?= for BB_NUMBER_THREADS and PARALLEL_MAKE
In the current local.conf, BB_NUMBER_THREADS and PARALLEL_MAKE are assigned by '=', which overwrites the values set from the Hob. To avoid that, use '?=' instead. [Yocto #2210] Signed-off-by: Shane Wang shane.w...@intel.com --- meta-yocto/conf/local.conf.sample |4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta-yocto/conf/local.conf.sample b/meta-yocto/conf/local.conf.sample index 38507e3..a4a8192 100644 --- a/meta-yocto/conf/local.conf.sample +++ b/meta-yocto/conf/local.conf.sample @@ -17,12 +17,12 @@ # These two options control how much parallelism BitBake should use. The first # option determines how many tasks bitbake should run in parallel: # -#BB_NUMBER_THREADS = 4 +#BB_NUMBER_THREADS ?= 4 # # The second option controls how many processes make should run in parallel when # running compile tasks: # -#PARALLEL_MAKE = -j 4 +#PARALLEL_MAKE ?= -j 4 # # For a quad-core machine, BB_NUMBER_THREADS = 4, PARALLEL_MAKE = -j 4 would # be appropriate for example. -- 1.7.6 ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Deleting layers in Hob
Thanks, Paul. What happens if the DISTRO is set to empty? Will the image build? Belen On 30/03/2012 13:19, Paul Eggleton paul.eggle...@linux.intel.com wrote: On Friday 30 March 2012 11:26:15 Barros Pena, Belen wrote: On 30/03/2012 07:32, Khem Raj raj.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 4:05 AM, Barros Pena, Belen belen.barros.p...@intel.com wrote: Do we have enough information to make a decision about the meta-yocto layer? I don't understand all the technical details, but I am inclined to make it non-deletable in Hob (i.e. it is not possible to delete this layer in Hob). What do you think? bad idea. Unless you intend to shackle hob to yocto. Is that the intention ? Well: I don't know. Does anybody have an answer? We don't want to tie hob to meta-yocto, no. The solution to this problem is to have Hob understand when removing a layer is removing the DISTRO selection that a user currently has made and warning them about it; if they respond in affirmative then DISTRO can be set to empty (or we can allow them to select an alternative, perhaps - something for the designers to consider). Fortunately since DISTRO points directly to a file in conf/distro/ the detection part is pretty easy to implement. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre - Intel Corporation (UK) Limited Registered No. 1134945 (England) Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ VAT No: 860 2173 47 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Deleting layers in Hob
On Monday 02 April 2012 10:48:23 Barros Pena, Belen wrote: Thanks, Paul. What happens if the DISTRO is set to empty? Will the image build? Yes it will still build, but it will use a default distro policy defined within OE-Core; this may imply some minor differences in build output. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Moving angstrom under the yocto banner
On Sun, 2012-04-01 at 21:08 -0700, Matthew McClintock wrote: I think we should consider a standard way of integrating layers and other bits. One method is (and I'm not recommending it) using 'git submodules' - another is 'androids repo command'. If all the distros (poky, angstrom, MEL, etc) could at least consider standardizing on something like this it starts to becoming more obvious what exactly is going on and what version of what is being pulled in and from where... I don't think there is common ground in this area to work with. There is a certain class of users who really need a single repo with all the pieces in to get started with. Poky and some of the solutions provided by various people on this list look like that. There is also the scripts approach taken by Angstrom and others and also the different commercial offerings from the OSVs which are different again. None of the implementations I've seen are wrong, they just help people in different ways (and have some downsides too). Maybe in time we'll see some standardisation in this area (we already have a small number of approaches rather than everyone being different) but at the moment, people are generally happy with their own solutions. I don't see much value in trying to force a standard way of doing things. Its orders of magnitude more important we share bitbake, OE-Core and make the layer model a success. Cheers, Richard ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 1/1] meta-yocto/local.conf.sample: change = to ?= for BB_NUMBER_THREADS and PARALLEL_MAKE
On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 17:23 +0800, Shane Wang wrote: In the current local.conf, BB_NUMBER_THREADS and PARALLEL_MAKE are assigned by '=', which overwrites the values set from the Hob. To avoid that, use '?=' instead. [Yocto #2210] Signed-off-by: Shane Wang shane.w...@intel.com --- meta-yocto/conf/local.conf.sample |4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) If the user has used = in their configuration files, hob needs to deal with this. It is not acceptable to patch the world to revolve around hob. So, no, I'm not going to take this patch, sorry. Cheers, Richard ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
[yocto] Yocto Project BSP Summit - IRC channel
For those attending the BSP Summit remotely, I have also set up an IRC channel for backchat. The channel is #yocto-bsp-summit on freenode. Join with your favorite IRC client or go to: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#yocto-bsp-summit -- Jeff Osier-Mixon http://jefro.net/blog Yocto Project Community Manager @Intel http://yoctoproject.org ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Moving angstrom under the yocto banner
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 07:27:16PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: [snip] You've mentioned preferring to do this with set versions of bitbake and oe-core. Do oe-core and bitbake maintain stable branches? I didn't think they did. This makes it difficult to stabilize a release, and poky serves this purpose well in my opinion. I'm going to stop going down this path though as the policies surrounding this aren't clear to me and would be better coming from others (RP or Chris for example). Again, the intention of poky the repository is not intended to have its own changes. oe-core will have a branch to go along with this release, just like meta-oe, meta-ti, meta-fsl-arm, meta-fsl-ppc, meta-intel and so forth. Richard has even been (from how the branch layout looks) been keeping master stable and doing master-next for things that will go in post release. I think at this point Richard (sorry!) really, really needs to find the time to make poky the distro be a separate layer and Yocto adopt some form of tooling, perhaps Angstrom's setup scripts with a little bit of abstraction, to replace the conglomerate repository and stop some of the confusion about repository directionality (and maybe move I need to resurrect idea X into a branch in upstream). This could even be done as part of Angstrom moving under the umbrella and one of the mutual benefits :) Without this, people working with The Yocto Project are back to using different versions of bitbake and oe-core depending on which distribution or BSP they are building, and we ultimately end up where we started with unsolvable dependency chains and people passing around fixup patches for this or that issue. Then perhaps non-SCM blobs should be part of a Yocto Project release. The point is that poky the repository is NOT an upstream for anything other than poky the distro specific things.` or as I will label them from now on: forks. Angstrom has been independent from poky and the Yocto Project in the past and I can understand not wanting to lose some of that individuality. However, too much individuality breeds chaos and fragmentation. I will draw a line in the sand here and say: Forcing people to ignore upstream (oe-core/bitbake) and force a fork down their throats breeds chaos and fragmentation. Don't be so dramatic Koen :-) Everybody involved knows the bitbake and oe-core in the poky repository are not forks, at least not in the sense you portray here. They are snapshots with the same maintainer (or subset of maintainers). They are no more forks than the stable Linux kernels maintained by Greg KH are forks of Linus' kernel. I won't presume to make a statement of policy regarding submitting patches against poky that aren't also destined for oe-core or bitbake as well, but I personally wouldn't deign to submit such a patch for fear of the wrath of Purdie (and a flame or two from a certain dutchman ;-). Yes, you the day to day developer understand the relationship between bitbake, oe-core and poky the distro within poky the repository. To the casual or new developer it's not clear because it's not done with git submodules or repo or other standard multi-git-repos-in-a-single-dir tools. It's just manual merge. I will again refer to the agreement between the OE community and yocto for doing the 'merge'. If you people (all speaking personally of course) really think poky is the only way to go, then please close down and remove the oe-core and bitbake repos. I see poky as collecting and integrating these projects into a known-to-work-well-together snapshot. I suppose this is similar to what the Angstrom setup scripts do, except the fetching is done for you in poky instead of after the fact in Angstrom. I think this is a more accurate description than calling them forks. So lets be clear. poky the repository is a collection of exiting branches or tags from other projects, done as a lets make this easy on new / casual users. So why should Angstrom be forced to include poky the repository in it's work-flow when the exact same results, excluding poky the distro, can be achieved by working upstream? -- Tom signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
[yocto] Agenda: Yocto Project Technical Team Meeting - Tuesday, April 03, 2012 8:00 AM-9:00 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US Canada).
Agenda * Opens collection - 5 min (Song) * Yocto 1.2 M4 status - 20 min (Song/Team) https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Project_v1.2_Status * SWAT team rotation: Paul - Saul. * Opens - 10 min * Team Sharing - 20 min -Original Appointment- Conference details Conference name: Yocto Technical Team Conference date/start time: Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 10:00 AM Central Daylight Time Participants: 30 Duration: 60 minutes Participant passcode: 49611427 Dial-in number: 1.972.995. US Toll Free number: 1.877.561.6828 BlackBerry users, click this link to join your conference as a chairperson: 1.972.995.x67184230# BlackBerry users, click this link to join your conference as a participant: 1.972.995.x49611427# Depending on where you are dialing from, either your BlackBerry will pause and enter the passcode automatically or you will be prompted to click again to dial the passcode. Local and Global Access Numbers Country Dial-in number Australia: 1800 636 843 Czech Republic: 242 430 350 China (Beijing): From office dial 8-995 or 8784277 Beijing Out of Office dial 5878 4277 China (Shanghai): From office dial 8-995 or 3073322 Shanghai Out of Office dial 2307 3322 China (Shenzen): From office dial 8-995 or 6007877 Shenzen Out of Office dial 2600 7877 China (Other Cities): From IP phone dial 8-995 Other cities - Non IP phone dial 021-23073322 Denmark: 8060 1400 Finland: 09 41333477 France: 0497 275888 Germany: 08161 803232 Holland: 030 2417490 India: BSNL subscribers use 1800 425 9996 (Toll Free) Airtel subscribers use 0008 009 861 212 (Toll Free) From TI Campus use 8995 Others use 2509 9555 (Landline within Bangalore) or 80 2509 9555 (Outside Bangalore) Israel: 09 790 6715 Italy: 039 69061234 (039 is local city code not country code) Japan: From TI Campus use 8 995 Outside TI use 03 4331 3777 Malaysia: From IP phone dial 2643799 From Kuala Lumpur dial 4264 3799 Outside Kuala Lumpur dial (03)4264 3799 Norway: 2 295 8744 Philippines: From Baguio City use 4471177 From Metro Manila area use 8702477 Singapore: From IP phone dial 3894777 Outside TI use 6389 4777 South Korea: From IP phone dial 5606998 From Seoul dial 5606998 Outside Seoul dial (02)5606998 Sweden: 08 58755577 Taiwan: From IP phone dial 1363 From Taipei dial 2241 1363 Outside Taipei dial (02)2241 1363 Turkey: Landline Only dial 0811 288 0001 then enter 877 633 1123 UK: 01604 663003 US: 972 995 or 1877 561 6828 Recurring conferences First scheduled conference: Tue Jun 28, 2011 Recurrence frequency: Weekly - Every 1 week(s) on Tuesday Recurrence ends: End on Fri Jun 22, 2012, 10:40 AM CDT ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Yocto project quickstart information
If any review of the package requirements as listed in the QS occurs, please review them from http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/latest/yocto-project-qs/yocto-project-qs.html#packages. This represents the latest QS version being prepared for 1.2 release. Thanks, Scott -Original Message- From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Bob Cochran Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 11:11 AM To: yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: [yocto] Yocto project quickstart information On 03/29/2012 11:04 AM, Barros Pena, Belen wrote: Should we review the required packages details for the other distros to make sure they are up to date? It might be worthwhile to also point out that additional packages are required to build the documentation. It might be nice to document the list and keep it up to date (note, I believe the yocto project docs and bitbake doc require a different package set). Also, these package lists would probably be better suited on the wiki where we all could mod it on the fly. ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] ref manual, ch 5, claims that toolchain should be installed under /opt/poky
Robert P. J. Day wrote on 2012-03-26: currently, ch 5 of the reference manual claims that a generated meta-toolchain tarball should be unpacked under /opt/poky, which might be *historically* correct but i just baked a meta-toolchain and its tarball contents are all prefixed with ./usr/local/, which seems inconsistent with that. Did you include the meta-yocto layer when you bake the meta-toolchain? /opt/poky is the default settings for the toolchain generated using meta-yocto layer, while oe-core uses /usr/local. I don't know why your prefix is ./usr/local. The location of toolchain should be configurable by the value of variable SDKPATH, but we didn't test it with other values in the context of meta-yocto layer. I don't think you can untar the meta-toolchain to any arbitrary place and have it work correctly. -Lianhao is the toolchain tarball relocatable these days? rday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
