[linux-yocto] [PATCH] samples: fix pidfd-metadata compilation

From: Guenter Roeck commit 7c33277b9a9ada187f805b41ffbebe6c51622fb6 upstream. Define __NR_pidfd_send_signal if it isn't to prevent a compilation error. To make pidfd-metadata compile on all arches, irrespective of whether or not syscall numbers are assigned, define the syscall number to -1. If

Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH] samples: fix pidfd-metadata compilation

Please ignore. On 6/11/19 11:38 AM, zhe...@windriver.com wrote: > From: Guenter Roeck > > Define __NR_pidfd_send_signal if it isn't to prevent a compilation error. > > To make pidfd-metadata compile on all arches, irrespective of whether > or not syscall numbers are assigned, define the syscall

[linux-yocto] [PATCH] samples: fix pidfd-metadata compilation

From: Guenter Roeck Define __NR_pidfd_send_signal if it isn't to prevent a compilation error. To make pidfd-metadata compile on all arches, irrespective of whether or not syscall numbers are assigned, define the syscall number to -1. If it isn't defined this will cause the kernel to return

[yocto] QA notification for completed autobuilder build (yocto-2.8_M1.rc2)

A build flagged for QA (yocto-2.8_M1.rc2) was completed on the autobuilder and is available at: https://autobuilder.yocto.io/pub/releases/yocto-2.8_M1.rc2 Build hash information: bitbake: c4d90890547af642e99cc541af3415df3559563e meta-gplv2: 168a5070bdf3bc45edb5bf2a1add9b7c081f5b64

[yocto] [meta-dpdk][PATCH] dpdk: mk: disable warning for packed member pointer

From: He Zhe Backport a patch from upstream to fix the following build failure. x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/include/rte_ether.h:178:2: error: converting a packed 'const struct ether_addr' pointer (alignment 1) to a 'unaligned_uint16_t' {aka 'const short unsigned int'} pointer (alignment 2) may

[yocto] [meta-dpdk][PATCH] dpdk: Fix do_compile failure for qemux86 and qemux86-64

From: He Zhe DPDK_TARGET_MACHINE in bbappend in other layers forms the dpdk-internal variable MACHINE_CFLAGS which is passed to dpdk compilation command line containing the first -march parameter. And EXTRA_CFLAGS in dpdk.inc is passed to dpdk command line containing the second -march parameter.

Re: [yocto] QA notification for completed autobuilder build (yocto-2.8_M1.rc1)

Richard, Thanks for informing! Best regards, Yeoh Ee Peng -Original Message- From: richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org [mailto:richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 6:18 AM To: Poky Build User ; yocto@yoctoproject.org Cc: ota...@ossystems.com.br;

Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 1/1] xilinx-zynqmp: add the basic support xilinx-zynqmp

Hi Bruce, I just finished insane check to build xilinx-zynqmp machine with core-image-sato, all passed with boot process. Could you please help me to create a branch like that standard/xilinx-zynqmp in the following git repo. in convenient your time, just directly branch out from

[yocto] [meta-anaconda][PATCH] .gitignore: add *.pyc and *.pyo

The .gitignore needs to contain these two items, otherwise, we get unstaged lib/oeqa/selftest/cases/__pycache__/ every time we run oe-selftest. Signed-off-by: Chen Qi --- .gitignore | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore index b093583..c01df45 100644 ---

Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 1/1] xilinx-zynqmp: add the basic support xilinx-zynqmp

On 6/10/19 9:37 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 8:00 PM Zumeng Chen wrote: Sounds I like mean, no, I just talk the reality, Xilinx did like the following: https://github.com/Xilinx/meta-xilinx/tree/master/meta-xilinx-bsp/recipes-kernel/linux/xilinx-kmeta/bsp I think they

Re: [yocto] QA notification for completed autobuilder build (yocto-2.8_M1.rc1)

On Mon, 2019-06-10 at 21:38 +, Poky Build User wrote: > A build flagged for QA (yocto-2.8_M1.rc1) was completed on the > autobuilder and is available at: > > > https://autobuilder.yocto.io/pub/releases/yocto-2.8_M1.rc1 > I've triggered an rc2 since one of the autobuilder workers messed

[yocto] QA notification for completed autobuilder build (yocto-2.8_M1.rc1)

A build flagged for QA (yocto-2.8_M1.rc1) was completed on the autobuilder and is available at: https://autobuilder.yocto.io/pub/releases/yocto-2.8_M1.rc1 Build hash information: bitbake: c4d90890547af642e99cc541af3415df3559563e meta-gplv2: 168a5070bdf3bc45edb5bf2a1add9b7c081f5b64

Re: [yocto] [meta-security][master][warrior][PATCH 0/3] python-scapy:solved the conflict with python3-scapy

On 6/10/19 12:24 AM, Zang Ruochen wrote: > -Remove redundant sed operations. > > -Rename conflicting files to resolve conflicts. merged to master. working on warrior thanks, - armin > > > Zang Ruochen (3): > [yocto][meta-security][master][warrior][PATCH 1/3] python-scapy: Remove >

Re: [yocto] [meta-security] AppArmor 2.11 no longer available on Ubuntu archive (sumo branch)

On 6/7/19 3:09 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: > That is deliberate and by design, recipes shouldn't fetch from > Debian/Ubuntu archives for this reason. > > http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-security/commit/?id=462d76700a3c2748067d4685db8985c511b1b46c > is a patch to master that needs to

Re: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 1/1] xilinx-zynqmp: add the basic support xilinx-zynqmp

On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 8:00 PM Zumeng Chen wrote: > > Sounds I like mean, no, I just talk the reality, Xilinx did like the > following: > > https://github.com/Xilinx/meta-xilinx/tree/master/meta-xilinx-bsp/recipes-kernel/linux/xilinx-kmeta/bsp > > I think they have a reason to share zynq-7000

Re: [yocto] Multiple MACHINEs and DISTROs: When to use own build dir, SSTATE_DIR, DL_DIR ?

On Mon, 2019-06-10 at 00:11 +0200, Ulf Samuelsson wrote: > Den 2019-05-09 kl. 11:56, skrev Burton, Ross: > > On Thu, 9 May 2019 at 10:47, Fabian Knapp > > wrote: > > > > we have multiple MACHINEs and DISTROs and Im wondering for > > which > > combinations I have

Re: [yocto] Multiple MACHINEs and DISTROs: When to use own build dir, SSTATE_DIR, DL_DIR ?

On Sun, 9 Jun 2019 at 23:19, Ulf Samuelsson wrote: > When you have the same machine, and the recipes have variants > which are DISTRO dependent the SSTATE_DIR can be messed up > > We never digged deep enough to find the cause, > but when we separated the SSTATE to only have one DISTRO > in the

Re: [yocto] [meta-security][master][warrior][PATCH 3/3] python3-scapy: solved the conflict with python-scapy

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 03:24:24PM +0800, Zang Ruochen wrote: > -Rename the following file to resolve the conflict with python-scapy: > Rename /usr/bin/UTscapy to /usr/bin/UTscapy3 > Rename /usr/bin/scapy to /usr/bin/scapy3 > > Signed-off-by: Zang Ruochen > --- >

[yocto] [meta-security][master][warrior][PATCH 1/3] python-scapy: Remove redundant sed operations

-Remove redundant sed operations. Signed-off-by: Zang Ruochen --- recipes-security/scapy/python-scapy.inc | 7 --- 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/recipes-security/scapy/python-scapy.inc b/recipes-security/scapy/python-scapy.inc index 99f30a7..baa69b2 100644 ---

[yocto] [meta-security][master][warrior][PATCH 2/3] python-scapy: solved the conflict with python3-scapy

-Rename the following file to resolve the conflict with python3-scapy: Rename /usr/bin/UTscapy to /usr/bin/UTscapy2 Rename /usr/bin/scapy to /usr/bin/scapy2 Signed-off-by: Zang Ruochen --- recipes-security/scapy/python-scapy_2.4.2.bb | 5 + 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

[yocto] [meta-security][master][warrior][PATCH 3/3] python3-scapy: solved the conflict with python-scapy

-Rename the following file to resolve the conflict with python-scapy: Rename /usr/bin/UTscapy to /usr/bin/UTscapy3 Rename /usr/bin/scapy to /usr/bin/scapy3 Signed-off-by: Zang Ruochen --- recipes-security/scapy/python3-scapy_2.4.2.bb | 4 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

[yocto] [meta-security][master][warrior][PATCH 0/3] python-scapy:solved the conflict with python3-scapy

-Remove redundant sed operations. -Rename conflicting files to resolve conflicts. Zang Ruochen (3): [yocto][meta-security][master][warrior][PATCH 1/3] python-scapy: Remove redundant sed operations [yocto][meta-security][master][warrior][PATCH 2/3] python-scapy: solved the conflict