Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 0/3] Enable more kernel configs
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 3:01 AM Anuj Mittal wrote: > > Hi Bruce, > > Could you merge in 4.19, 5.0 and master if these look okay? Thank you. > They look fine to me, and are now on those three branches. Bruce > Anuj Mittal (3): > security.cfg: unset HARDENED_USERCOPY_FALLBACK > features: add support for RANDOM_TRUST_CPU > intel-common-drivers: enable RANDOM_TRUST_CPU for Intel BSPs > > bsp/intel-common/intel-common-drivers.scc | 1 + > features/random/random.cfg| 1 + > features/random/random.scc| 4 > features/security/security.cfg| 1 + > 4 files changed, 7 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 features/random/random.cfg > create mode 100644 features/random/random.scc > > -- > 2.20.1 > > -- > ___ > linux-yocto mailing list > linux-yocto@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/linux-yocto -- - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II -- ___ linux-yocto mailing list linux-yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/linux-yocto
Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 0000/1228] xilinx-zynqmp: add sdk patches
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 9:36 AM Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 8:30 AM Michal Simek wrote: > > > > On 16. 07. 19 21:44, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 2:19 AM Wei, Yunguo > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> On 7/8/2019 9:14 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > >>> On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 5:59 AM wrote: > > From: Quanyang Wang > > > > Hi Bruce, > > > > I am working on BSP xilinx-zynqmp. > > > > Could you please help to merge these patches to: > > > > linux-yocto-dev standard/xilinx-zynqmp > > > > These patches are picked from: > > > > https://github.com/Xilinx/linux-xlnx.git xlnx_rebase_v4.19 > > >>> We already have a 4.19 branch based on Michal's tree, which was > > >>> curated and selected for the soc support. > > >>> Did you you look at the one in linux-yocto 4.19 ? Since it is a > > >>> specifically selected set of patches and might be a better starting > > >>> point. > > >>> > > >>> Before I introduce a 5.x branch, I'd want to hear his opinion on the > > >>> branch and the selections that you made, versus what he would have > > >>> done. > > >> > > >> Hi Bruce, Michal, > > >> > > >> Any further comments on it? > > >> > > > > > > I'll try getting comments from Michal via another method, he may be on > > > vacation. I'd still like to hear from him. > > > > > > But generally speaking, since the base is the same, I have no issues > > > with the branch. I'll likely call the branch the same as we have in > > > 4.19, but otherwise, will leave things as they are. > > > > Xilinx is going to stay at 4.19 for the whole 2019 and new patches are > > coming to our master branch and then they will be propagated to rebased > > branch. After the initial patchset adding new patches is easy. > > It means at some point in future I will sync current master with rebase > > branch and ask you for adding these patches to yocto tree too. > > If there is any immediate need to add/fix something there we can do it > > earlier. > > Please let me know what you think. I should be back in August. > > No issues on my end, that strategy works for me. > > I'll create the -dev (5.2) branches and stage the patches there. > Incremental updates are fine, and we can handle them as they come. See the standard/xlnx-soc branch in the -dev kernel for the results of the merge. Bruce > > Cheers, > > Bruce > > > > > Thanks, > > Michal > > > > > -- > - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await > thee at its end > - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II -- - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II -- ___ linux-yocto mailing list linux-yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/linux-yocto
Re: [yocto] How to specify a different kernel for an image
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 10:03 AM Gabriele Zampieri wrote: >> 2. My new image going to be used as an installation image for my >> production image. So I need to include the production image (for >> MACHINE="mymachine")) deploy products in the image for my installation >> image. How can I do that if I define a new MACHINE for the production >> image? > > > This is not clear to me. With 'installation image' do you mean a full image > (bootloader, kernel, rootfs etc)? > Can you give me some more details about this use case? > Hi Gabriele, Thank you again so much for your help! My use case is as follows: I need to create an image that will go on a USB stick that we use when we manufacture our boards. That image will be used to flash the production image that we ship. The manufacturing image will have a different kernel configuration, possibly a different device tree, and certainly a different rootfs than our production image. I would like to: $ bitbake manufacturing-image and have the build system set up so that it builds production-image and includes production-image-ubi.img as a file in the rootfs for my manufacturing-image. It seems to me that production-image-ubi.img must be built with MACHINE=mymachine manufacturing-image would have to be built with MACHINE=my-manufacturing-machine ...and that's where I get confused/concerned about using a different MACHINE for my manufacturing image vs my production image. --wpd -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] ERROR: Actual rootfs size is larger than allowed
On 7/19/19 4:27 AM, María del Mar Velasco AERTEC Solutions – Aerospace & Aviation wrote: Dear all, I am new at Yocto Project and I have a simple question. I have cloned poky (rocko branch), sourced the environment and bitbaked the core-minimal-image-dev without problems. I can write the image in a SD Card and I am able to boot the system. However, when I add IMAGE_INSTALL_append to local.conf with some packages recipes (IMAGE_INSTALL_append = “nodejs” for example), I get the following error: * ERROR: Function failed: do_image_wic * ERROR: Actual rootfs size (284260 KB) is larger than allowed size 262144 KB. My question is: where could I find that 262144 KB default size value? I would like to change it and make it bigger. I have tried to add IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE = “500” to local.conf file but it still fails. you might want to check the kickstart ( .wks ) file and adjust the --fixed-size values for partition sizes I attach the log.do_image_wic file. Thanks you in advance, MM -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] How to specify a different kernel for an image
Hi Patrick,
Do I have to replicate (and maintain) all of the references to
> mymachine to also refer to my newly defined "installationmachine"? Or
> can I tell Bitbake that "installationmachine" is the same as
> "mymachine", and just add/change new stuff for "installationmachine"?
>
I would approach in this way: in my meta-something/conf/machine:
- machine_base.inc where I put all the standard machine configuration for
production
- mymachine.conf
require conf/machine/machine_base.inc
- myinstallationmachine.conf
require conf/machine/machine_base.inc
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel = "some-linux-provider"
Then in something.bbappend:
- If the property is common to both machines:
SRC_URI_append = " file://modifications.patch"
- if the property is machine specific:
SRC_URI_append_ = " file://machinespec.patch"
In this way you have to maintain only the differences between your
machines, without redundancy.
2. My new image going to be used as an installation image for my
> production image. So I need to include the production image (for
> MACHINE="mymachine")) deploy products in the image for my installation
> image. How can I do that if I define a new MACHINE for the production
> image?
>
This is not clear to me. With 'installation image' do you mean a full image
(bootloader, kernel, rootfs etc)?
Can you give me some more details about this use case?
Best regards,
Gabriele
Il giorno ven 19 lug 2019 alle ore 14:49 Patrick Doyle
ha scritto:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 1:58 AM Gabriele Zampieri
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > you could define two machines, where the manufacturing one is just an
> overlay of the production one. If the two kernels differs only for their
> config, you can specify different defconfig based on machine. If you need a
> completely different kernel, just specify
> PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel in manufacturing overlay
>
> Hi Gabriele,
> I wondered about that, but I get confused about the MACHINE concept in
> Yocto/OE/bitbake...
>
> 1. If I define a new machine, but I have a lot of recipes conditioned
> on the old machine, how do I say "This is the same as machine A, but
> with these differences"? I have defined a machine now ("mymachine")
> and have recipes and .bbappend files with things like this in them:
>
> SRC_URI_mymachine += "file:/blah/blah/blah"
> do_install_append_mymachine() {
> do_stuff()
> }
>
> Do I have to replicate (and maintain) all of the references to
> mymachine to also refer to my newly defined "installationmachine"? Or
> can I tell Bitbake that "installationmachine" is the same as
> "mymachine", and just add/change new stuff for "installationmachine"?
>
> I hope my confusion here makes sense, but since it's confusion, it's
> tough to tell :-)
>
> 2. My new image going to be used as an installation image for my
> production image. So I need to include the production image (for
> MACHINE="mymachine")) deploy products in the image for my installation
> image. How can I do that if I define a new MACHINE for the production
> image?
>
> Thank you so much for the suggestion... it confirms that I am looking
> in the right places and thinking about the right things... I just
> don't know how to solve this problem.
>
> I'm also surprised that it's not a more general problem... which leads
> me to believe that I must be thinking about this the wrong way.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> --wpd
>
--
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Setting home directory ownership
Sorry. I was using NFS boot and was copying over the rootfs with "cp -r"
instead of "cp -a", the permissions are fine. The only issue that remains
is that I have to use "chmod -R 1000" i.e. the UID instead of the username
otherwise I get the following error:
"""
| DEBUG: Python function extend_recipe_sysroot finished
| DEBUG: Executing shell function do_install
| install: invalid user ‘someusername’
"""
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 14:17, Sergio Torres Soldado <
torres.sold...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am unable to set the home directory ownership. I am using poky@warrior
> and my last attempt was the following recipe:
>
> """
> inherit useradd
> USERADD_PACKAGES = "${PN}"
>
> USERADD_PARAM_${PN} = "-P someusername -u 1000 -d /home/someusername -r -s
> /bin/bash foosomeusername"
>
> LICENSE = "CLOSED"
>
> do_install () {
> install -d ${D}/home/someusername
> # If I don't use the UID I get an error message saying "invalid user:
> hubshuffle", although it seems to work for some usernames e.g. "user1" like
> in the skeleton recipe for useradd.
> chown -R 1000 ${D}/home/foosomeusername
> }
>
> pkg_postinst_${PN} () {
> chown -R 1000 $D/home/someusername
> }
>
> FILES_${PN} = " \
> /home/someusername \
> "
> """
>
> I don't know what I am doing wrong, any hint is very welcome thanks.
>
--
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
[yocto] Setting home directory ownership
I am unable to set the home directory ownership. I am using poky@warrior
and my last attempt was the following recipe:
"""
inherit useradd
USERADD_PACKAGES = "${PN}"
USERADD_PARAM_${PN} = "-P someusername -u 1000 -d /home/someusername -r -s
/bin/bash foosomeusername"
LICENSE = "CLOSED"
do_install () {
install -d ${D}/home/someusername
# If I don't use the UID I get an error message saying "invalid user:
hubshuffle", although it seems to work for some usernames e.g. "user1" like
in the skeleton recipe for useradd.
chown -R 1000 ${D}/home/foosomeusername
}
pkg_postinst_${PN} () {
chown -R 1000 $D/home/someusername
}
FILES_${PN} = " \
/home/someusername \
"
"""
I don't know what I am doing wrong, any hint is very welcome thanks.
--
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] How to specify a different kernel for an image
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 1:58 AM Gabriele Zampieri
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> you could define two machines, where the manufacturing one is just an overlay
> of the production one. If the two kernels differs only for their config, you
> can specify different defconfig based on machine. If you need a completely
> different kernel, just specify PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel in
> manufacturing overlay
Hi Gabriele,
I wondered about that, but I get confused about the MACHINE concept in
Yocto/OE/bitbake...
1. If I define a new machine, but I have a lot of recipes conditioned
on the old machine, how do I say "This is the same as machine A, but
with these differences"? I have defined a machine now ("mymachine")
and have recipes and .bbappend files with things like this in them:
SRC_URI_mymachine += "file:/blah/blah/blah"
do_install_append_mymachine() {
do_stuff()
}
Do I have to replicate (and maintain) all of the references to
mymachine to also refer to my newly defined "installationmachine"? Or
can I tell Bitbake that "installationmachine" is the same as
"mymachine", and just add/change new stuff for "installationmachine"?
I hope my confusion here makes sense, but since it's confusion, it's
tough to tell :-)
2. My new image going to be used as an installation image for my
production image. So I need to include the production image (for
MACHINE="mymachine")) deploy products in the image for my installation
image. How can I do that if I define a new MACHINE for the production
image?
Thank you so much for the suggestion... it confirms that I am looking
in the right places and thinking about the right things... I just
don't know how to solve this problem.
I'm also surprised that it's not a more general problem... which leads
me to believe that I must be thinking about this the wrong way.
Thanks again.
--wpd
--
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
[yocto] ERROR: Actual rootfs size is larger than allowed
Dear all, I am new at Yocto Project and I have a simple question. I have cloned poky (rocko branch), sourced the environment and bitbaked the core-minimal-image-dev without problems. I can write the image in a SD Card and I am able to boot the system. However, when I add IMAGE_INSTALL_append to local.conf with some packages recipes (IMAGE_INSTALL_append = “nodejs” for example), I get the following error: * ERROR: Function failed: do_image_wic * ERROR: Actual rootfs size (284260 KB) is larger than allowed size 262144 KB. My question is: where could I find that 262144 KB default size value? I would like to change it and make it bigger. I have tried to add IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE = “500” to local.conf file but it still fails. I attach the log.do_image_wic file. Thanks you in advance, MM log.do_image_wic.4351 Description: log.do_image_wic.4351 -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
[yocto] meta-openstack: bundler fails to build
Hi, I'm trying to build bundler ruby tool from meta-openstack (thud branch) but it fails with following: ERROR: bundler-1.6.2-r0 do_compile: Function failed: do_compile (log file is located at /home/builder/build/tmp/work/cortexa8hf-neon-poky-linux-gnueabi/bundler/1.6.2-r0/temp/log.do_compile.2232) ERROR: Logfile of failure stored in: /home/builder/build/tmp/work/cortexa8hf-neon-poky-linux-gnueabi/bundler/1.6.2-r0/temp/log.do_compile.2232 Log data follows: | DEBUG: Executing shell function do_compile | ERROR: Loading command: build (LoadError) | cannot load such file -- zlib | ERROR: While executing gem ... (NoMethodError) | undefined method `invoke_with_build_args' for nil:NilClass | WARNING: exit code 1 from a shell command. Any ideas what should be checked (I'm not familiar with ruby at all). I plan to also bump bundler to 2.0 version so can share then results and recipe. Thanks. BR, marek -- as simple and primitive as possible - Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA Freelance Developer Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic Tel: +421 915 052 184 skype: marekwhite twitter: #opennandra web: http://open-nandra.com -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
