Re: [yocto] Clarification regarding GCC tool version supported on - Krogoth 2.1.1

This is more likely to work: bitbake-layers show-recipes gcc Cheers, Paul On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 21:19:59 Sandeep G.R wrote: > Hi Vijay, > > You can run *"bitbake-layers show-recipes | grep gcc-source"* to know more > on supported toolchain versions. > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:55 AM,

Re: [yocto] Clarification regarding GCC tool version supported on - Krogoth 2.1.1

Hi Vijay, You can run *"bitbake-layers show-recipes | grep gcc-source"* to know more on supported toolchain versions. On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Vijayakumar Badiger < vijayakuma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Paul, appreciate your reply. > > Cheers, > Vijay > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at

Re: [yocto] [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH] linux-raspberrypi: Add recipes and patches for 4.8 release

On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 09:39:46PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj > --- > .../0001-fix-dtbo-rules.patch | 44 > ++ > ...835-camera-fix-compilation-warning-werror.patch | 35 + >

Re: [linux-yocto] [yocto-kernel-cache] [PATCH 0/4] Configs only for Leaf Hill BSP

On 10/12/2016 12:56 AM, Rebecca Chang Swee Fun wrote: Hi Bruce, The reason for these changes for Leaf Hill BSP is we have special requirements for specific drivers to be compiled as built-in feature and some need to be loadable modules. We understand that most of the configs has its own

Re: [linux-yocto] [yocto-kernel-cache][PATCH 0/2] Fix kernel_configcheck warnings in Intel BSPs

On 10/12/2016 06:55 PM, California Sullivan wrote: These patches fix most of the configcheck warnings we see with the 4.8 kenel. There are still a couple that I haven't decided how to solve yet, but it gets most of them. With intel-quark we get: Config: CONFIG_INV_MPU6050_I2C Requested value:

Re: [linux-yocto] [kernel-meta] meta-yocto-bsp: beaglebone: remove the stale kernel options

On 10/08/2016 03:37 AM, Kevin Hao wrote: On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 03:36:34PM +0800, Kevin Hao wrote: On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:00:25PM +0800, Kevin Hao wrote: The kernel_configcheck complains about these unnecessary kernel options. The final .config is the same with or without them. Hi

Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH] Backport smack patch from 4.6 to 4.4

On 10/11/2016 02:24 PM, Saul Wold wrote: On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 11:58 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote: On 2016-10-11 11:51 AM, Saul Wold wrote: Bruce, Please merge this backported patch to 4.4, it's a backport so it can go in either standard/base or standard/intel/base. Ultimately it's needed in

[linux-yocto] [yocto-kernel-cache][PATCH 0/2] Fix kernel_configcheck warnings in Intel BSPs

These patches fix most of the configcheck warnings we see with the 4.8 kenel. There are still a couple that I haven't decided how to solve yet, but it gets most of them. With intel-quark we get: Config: CONFIG_INV_MPU6050_I2C Requested value: CONFIG_INV_MPU6050_I2C=m Actual value: Due to

[linux-yocto] [PATCH 1/2] features: Fix configcheck warnings in features used by intel-core* BSPs

IOSF_MBI gets selected by CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS, forcing it to =y and giving us a warning in the kernel_configcheck stage. Fix this by setting CONFIG_IOSF_MBI=y. INV_MPU6050, MPL115, and NFC_PN533 all had their core driver separated from specific implementations such as I2C, SPI, and USB, and can

[linux-yocto] [PATCH 2/2] features: Fix configcheck warnings in features used by intel-quark BSPs

In mei-me.cfg, CONFIG_PCI was mistakenly set to =m when its a boolean. In bosch-pressure-sensor-i2c, change CONFIG_BMP085 to =m instead of =y, as its dependency is a module. Also attempt to disable BMP280, as it conflicts with the BMP085 driver and throws a warning. In x1000.cfg, remove CONSOLE

Re: [yocto] Conflict between multilib glibc and non-multlib glibc

I wanted to add that it's specifically the glibc development packages which have this fpu_control.h file conflict. IMAGE_INSTALL += "glibc-dev" IMAGE_INSTALL += "lib32-glibc-dev" -Glenn From: Stroz, Glenn Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 4:54 PM To: 'yocto@yoctoproject.org'

[yocto] [PATCH] ref-manual: remove reference to RM_OLD_IMAGE

RM_OLD_IMAGE has been removed as it's now the default behaviour. Signed-off-by: Joshua Lock --- documentation/ref-manual/ref-variables.xml | 22 -- 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) diff --git a/documentation/ref-manual/ref-variables.xml

Re: [yocto] [[PATCHv5][yocto-autobuilder]] buildset.controller: Add build set to test new OS distribution in autobuilder

On 10/12/2016 05:51 AM, Beth 'pidge' Flanagan wrote: > On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 09:54 -0500, Aníbal Limón wrote: >> From: Monserrat Sedeno >> >> As part of the process to set new OS distribution as supported on >> Yoctoc Project >> a new patch was created with

Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH] Backport smack patch from 4.6 to 4.4

That'll work. I've arrived in berlin, and should get to a keyboard for long enough to merge this in a few hours. Bruce On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Saul Wold wrote: > On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 11:58 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > On 2016-10-11 11:51 AM, Saul Wold

Re: [yocto] machine specific task

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 12:58 +0300, Mircea Gliga wrote: > > According to the docs here > > http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.1.1/mega-manual/mega- > manual.html#structure-your-layers > > one can specify variables that

Re: [yocto] [yocto-autobuilder][PATCH] PublishArtifacts.py: deal only with built toolchains, cp also md5 and manifests

On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 07:28 -0700, Bill Randle wrote: > Hi Robert, > > Then "normal" method to send patches is via direct insertion into the > email, rather than an attachment (see git-send-email). Also, it is > missing a commit comment as the first text in the patch file. > Otherwise, it looks

Re: [yocto] [yocto-autobuilder][PATCH] PublishArtifacts.py: deal only with built toolchains, cp also md5 and manifests

On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 01:44 -0500, gm...@reliableembeddedsystems.com wrote: > A few notes (not picking on this patch but it does point out some design failures and I want to at least get this on folks radar). I've been unhappy with how DeployArtifacts work for sometime. Long ago, when I wrote

Re: [yocto] yocto - linaro's lava integration

On Monday, October 10, 2016 12:23:07 PM EDT alfonso wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I'm trying to integrate the testing of the resulting yocto images using > Linaro's LAVA project. > > For now I am only using qemux86 images. > > Now, I am quite a newbie in both projects and maybe in general on the

Re: [yocto] [yocto-autobuilder][PATCH] PublishArtifacts.py: deal only with built toolchains, cp also md5 and manifests

Hi Robert, Then "normal" method to send patches is via direct insertion into the email, rather than an attachment (see git-send-email). Also, it is missing a commit comment as the first text in the patch file. Otherwise, it looks good to me now. -Bill 2016-10-09 23:44 GMT-07:00

Re: [yocto] machine specific task

On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 12:58 +0300, Mircea Gliga wrote: > According to the docs here > http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.1.1/mega-manual/mega-manual.html#structure-your-layers > > one can specify variables that are machine specific, eg > KERNEL_DEVICETREE_qemuarm = "versatile-pb.dtb". I can't

Re: [yocto] [[PATCHv5][yocto-autobuilder]] buildset.controller: Add build set to test new OS distribution in autobuilder

On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 09:54 -0500, Aníbal Limón wrote: > From: Monserrat Sedeno > > As part of the process to set new OS distribution as supported on > Yoctoc Project > a new patch was created with the list of build sets that should be > executed. > >

[yocto] machine specific task

According to the docs here http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.1.1/mega-manual/mega-manual.html#structure-your-layers one can specify variables that are machine specific, eg KERNEL_DEVICETREE_qemuarm = "versatile-pb.dtb". I can't find a reference on how to create a task specific only for a

[yocto] Py_ENABLE_SHARED in Python cross-build

Hello Yocto. I recently encountered following issue with Python module cross-build. (On Yocto 2.0 based build system, using distutils.bbclass) http://bugs.python.org/issue28421 Firstly I believed it is a Python issue, but further looked into, Yocto build environment has some cutomization

Re: [yocto] Release Candidate Build for yocto-2.2.rc1.rc1 now available.

On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 08:07 +, Poky Build User wrote: > A release candidate build for yocto-2.2.rc1 is now available at: > > > http://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/pub/releases/yocto-2.2.rc1 > > > Please begin QA on this build as soon as possible. This isn't a useful QA target

Re: [yocto] Release Candidate Build for yocto-2.2.rc1.rc1 now available.

On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 08:07 +, Poky Build User wrote: > A release candidate build for yocto-2.2.rc1 is now available at: > > > http://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/pub/releases/yocto-2.2.rc1 > > > Please begin QA on this build as soon as possible. This isn't a useful QA target as not

[yocto] Release Candidate Build for yocto-2.2.rc1.rc1 now available.

A release candidate build for yocto-2.2.rc1 is now available at: http://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/pub/releases/yocto-2.2.rc1 Please begin QA on this build as soon as possible. Build hash information: meta-qt4 : fc9b050569e94b5176bed28b69ef28514e4e4553 meta-intel :