Re: build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-03 Thread Chavdar Ivanov
On 11/03/18 04:50, m...@netbsd.org wrote: On Sat, Nov 03, 2018 at 04:44:18AM +, m...@netbsd.org wrote: Changing the actual triplets is probably a bad idea because the decisions are embedded in a lot of configure scripts in random third party code. But perhaps we need to rename things so

Re: build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-02 Thread maya
On Sat, Nov 03, 2018 at 04:44:18AM +, m...@netbsd.org wrote: > Changing the actual triplets is probably a bad idea because the > decisions are embedded in a lot of configure scripts in random third > party code. > But perhaps we need to rename things so no users end up using it by > accident.

Re: build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-02 Thread maya
"compiled for earmv7hf" is just some text that NetBSD adds in to binaries it builds, it doesn't need to be meaningful. the "EABI5" part must be correct, but file doesn't try to distinguish more than "ARMv1" and "EABI5" (it doesn't make sense to try harder, you can write code to do v7 and v5 in

Re: build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-02 Thread Greg Troxel
Chavdar Ivanov writes: > It would benefit from some clarification regarding the ARM ecosystem > indeed. So far I've always used ' evbarm' for my RPI builds and > wondered if I can skip the building of the rest. I think there are two separate issues behind your comment. First is the type of

Re: build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-02 Thread Chavdar Ivanov
It would benefit from some clarification regarding the ARM ecosystem indeed. So far I've always used ' evbarm' for my RPI builds and wondered if I can skip the building of the rest. Anyway, with 'evbearmv6hf-el' the build completed successfully. On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 at 19:42, Greg Troxel wrote: >

Re: build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-02 Thread Greg Troxel
Nick Hudson writes: > RPI should use evbearmv6hf-el > RPI2 should use evbearmv7hf-el > > I'm thinking evbarm should alias to evbearmv7hf-el these days Maybe, but another theory is that we should have a bunch of aliases and that -a evbarm should just error out, because whoever invoked it that

Re: build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-02 Thread Nick Hudson
On 02/11/2018 14:33, Chavdar Ivanov wrote: This is the command line: ./build.sh -D/home/sysbuild/evbarm/destdir -M/home/sysbuild/evbarm/obj -N2 -R/home/sysbuild/release -T/home/sysbuild/evbarm/tools -U -X/home/sysbuild/xsrc -j8 -mevbarm -u -x release live-image It is actually done by

Re: build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-02 Thread Chavdar Ivanov
This is the command line: ./build.sh -D/home/sysbuild/evbarm/destdir -M/home/sysbuild/evbarm/obj -N2 -R/home/sysbuild/release -T/home/sysbuild/evbarm/tools -U -X/home/sysbuild/xsrc -j8 -mevbarm -u -x release live-image It is actually done by sysutils/sysbuild (obviously); I need only

Re: build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-02 Thread Robert Swindells
Chavdar Ivanov wrote: >With sources from about an hour ago I cannot complete distribution >build for evbarm: >--- >ymir% pwd >/home/sysbuild/evbarm/obj/home/sysbuild/src/sys/arch/evbarm/compile/GENERIC >ymir% CC=/home/sysbuild/evbarm/tools/bin/arm--netbsdelf-eabi-gcc

Re: build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-02 Thread Martin Husemann
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 01:04:33PM +, Chavdar Ivanov wrote: > The last (third) attempt was with fresh obj directory; I also did > 'make cleandir' in the src directory just in case (in the past this > has helped). It is best to check the autobuild results in such cases, they fail the same (and

build.sh distribution failure for evbarm

2018-11-02 Thread Chavdar Ivanov
Hi, With sources from about an hour ago I cannot complete distribution build for evbarm: --- ymir% pwd /home/sysbuild/evbarm/obj/home/sysbuild/src/sys/arch/evbarm/compile/GENERIC ymir% CC=/home/sysbuild/evbarm/tools/bin/arm--netbsdelf-eabi-gcc /home/sysbuild/evbarm/tools/bin/nbmkdep -f