Re: [yocto] clarifying "PROVIDES =" versus "PROVIDES +=" (pedantic stuff)

On Sat, 8 Feb 2020, Jonatan Palsson wrote: > Hello Robert & Leon, > > > So I think it might be harmful to replace it with "=", as it would no > > longer provide libpcre. > > I had a look at the variable expansions bitbake -e. Here are two > examples. The vim recipe uses "PROVIDES = xxd" (which wou

[yocto] [PATCH] ref-manual: update PROVIDES entry, "+=" -> "="

Change the use of "+=" to the more proper "="; also, use a different recipe example that actually exists in OE-Core at the moment. Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day --- diff --git a/documentation/ref-manual/ref-variables.xml b/documentation/ref-manual/ref-variables.xml index 02abc590c..c9b8c665

[yocto] [meta-rockchip][PATCH v2 1/2] Add configuration parameter to set boot device for the image

From: Sergey 'Jin' Bostandzhyan wic modifies /etc/fstab on the root file system during image generation, without the --ondisk parameter it assumes some default device name which leads to an /etc/fstab file populated with /dev/sda entries. This is not correct for the machines in the rockchip layer

[yocto] [meta-rockchip][PATCH v2 2/2] Add tinker-board-s machine configuration

From: Sergey 'Jin' Bostandzhyan Asus Tinker Board-S has emmc on mmcblk1, this is also the default configuration when building the image. If you need an image for booting from the sd card set RK_BOOT_DEVICE to mmcblk0 Signed-off-by: Sergey Bostandzhyan --- README | 1

[yocto] How to figure out what triggers the rebuild of a certain task/recipe

Hey, I'm debugging a issue in the sdcard generation recipe of a NXP provided class (image_types_fsl). So I'm only interested in their workings of the do_image_sdcard step, however yocto rebuilds the complete rootfs on every call. I already tried limiting the tasks/commands by going to to run $

[yocto] reviving an old suggestion about YP docs markup

with the recent loss of scott rifenbark, since i used to be fairly active in working on the docs, i figure it's time to get off my a** and get involved again and contribute. to that end, i once made a suggestion about being more precise about the docbook markup being used in the YP manuals. i

Re: [yocto] reviving an old suggestion about YP docs markup

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 11:13, rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: > first, yes, if something is a filename, then is the > obvious markup. > > on the other hand, variables should properly be marked up as > , which they currently aren't. a good example is in the > reference manual, the variables, wher

Re: [yocto] clarifying "PROVIDES =" versus "PROVIDES +=" (pedantic stuff)

On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 05:32 -0500, rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: > second, i think we all agree that it is rarely necessary to use > "PROVIDES +=", although i did run across one case in > recipes-core/glibc/glibc.inc: > > PROVIDES = "virtual/libc" > PROVIDES += "virtual/libintl virtual/libico

Re: [yocto] clarifying "PROVIDES =" versus "PROVIDES +=" (pedantic stuff)

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 05:32 -0500, rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: > > second, i think we all agree that it is rarely necessary to use > > "PROVIDES +=", although i did run across one case in > > recipes-core/glibc/glibc.inc: > > > > PROVIDES = "virtua

Re: [yocto] reviving an old suggestion about YP docs markup

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020, Ross Burton wrote: > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 11:13, rpj...@crashcourse.ca > wrote: > > first, yes, if something is a filename, then is the > > obvious markup. > > > > on the other hand, variables should properly be marked up as > > , which they currently aren't. a good ex

Re: [yocto] reviving an old suggestion about YP docs markup

My problem with is that you need to keep on reviewing to verify it is the first usage. Better to post-process that, surely. Ross On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 14:35, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020, Ross Burton wrote: > > > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 11:13, rpj...@crashcourse.ca > > wrot

Re: [yocto] reviving an old suggestion about YP docs markup

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020, Ross Burton wrote: > My problem with is that you need to keep on reviewing to > verify it is the first usage. Better to post-process that, surely. but that's not the way it's normally used ... doesn't necessarily mean the physically first time a term is used, it's more t

Re: [yocto] reviving an old suggestion about YP docs markup

Ah gotcha. My docbook-fu is somewhat hazy. Yes, seems sensible. Ross On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 14:43, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020, Ross Burton wrote: > > > My problem with is that you need to keep on reviewing to > > verify it is the first usage. Better to post-process that,

[yocto] why is poky described as not something you can use "out of the box"?

from the overview manual, section 2.5, "Reference Embedded Distribution (Poky)", there is the note: "While Poky is a "complete" distribution specification and is tested and put through QA, you cannot use it as a product "out of the box" in its current form." sure, to be *generally* useful, you

[yocto] Yocto Project Status WW06'20

Current Dev Position: YP 3.1 M3 Next Deadline: YP 3.1 M3 build date 2/24/2020 Next Team Meetings: * Bug Triage meeting Thursday Feb. 13th at 7:30am PDT ( https://zoom.us/j/454367603) * Monthly Project Meeting Tuesday Mar. 3rd at 8am PDT (

[yocto] [meta-rockchip][PATCH] Allow to override WKS_FILE variable

From: Sergey 'Jin' Bostandzhyan Currently machine configs define the partition layout for each machine by setting the WKS_FILE variable. However, there are situations where it may be needed to use a different, non default layout. To simplify such configurations we will set WKS_FILE using ?= so th

[yocto] [meta-rockchip][PATCH v2] Allow to override WKS_FILE variable

From: Sergey 'Jin' Bostandzhyan Currently machine configs define the partition layout for each machine by setting the WKS_FILE variable. However, there are situations where it may be needed to use a different, non default layout. To simplify such configurations we will set WKS_FILE using ?= so th

[yocto] how to remove a package from image

My vendor finally realized that I needed a full yocto release and not the eSDK. Anyway, I can build their image, but when I modify the kernel to remove CAN drivers I get the errors that packagegroup-can-support packagegroup-ow-support are required. What is the "yocto way" to remove those packa

Re: [yocto] how to remove a package from image

You need to modify the image recipe so that those packagegroups are not pulled in. If you cannot do that because it's in a layer controlled by someone else etc, then make a new image recipe, and build that image instead. Alex On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 18:05, Kent Dorfman wrote: > My vendor finally

[yocto] [PATCH] overview-manual: chs 1-3, various minor tweaks/cleanups

Minor fixes: - punctuation - capitalization - markup - wording Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day --- diff --git a/documentation/overview-manual/overview-manual-development-environment.xml b/documentation/overview-manual/overview-manual-development-environment.xml index 2f1bd1610..dd12

Re: [yocto] [PATCH] overview-manual: chs 1-3, various minor tweaks/cleanups

On 2/11/20 11:16 AM, rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: > Minor fixes: > > - punctuation > - capitalization > - markup > - wording > > Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day Wrong ML. We have a d...@lists.yoctoproject.org with patchwork support. - armin > > --- > > diff --git > a/documentation/ove

Re: [yocto] how to remove a package from image

was able to modify the vendor's machine/inc file to remove the offending package. Since the whole tree is in git now, I suppose that's OK, but I do wish yocto had better tools for managing inclusions and introspection into what is in an image and at what level it's defined. On 2/11/20, Alexander

Re: [yocto] how to remove a package from image

On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 06:50:09PM -0500, Kent Dorfman wrote: > was able to modify the vendor's machine/inc file to remove the > offending package. > Since the whole tree is in git now, I suppose that's OK, but I do wish > yocto had better tools for managing inclusions and introspection into > what

[yocto] [error-report-web][PATCH] Add SPDX license headers to source files

Post/* all ( except Post/migrations/* , __init__.py and templatetags/* ) have some sort of MIT headers; adding SPDX header to make it obvious. project/* & test-data/* all ( except __init__.py ) have some sort of MIT headers; adding SPDX header to make it obvious. This address bug #13530 https://

Re: [yocto] how to remove a package from image

Yocto is a community project. If you think such a tool is missing, patches are welcome. Talk to your employer about ability to contribute under your real name. Alex On Wed 12. Feb 2020 at 0.50, Kent Dorfman wrote: > was able to modify the vendor's machine/inc file to remove the > offending pack

[yocto] QA notification for completed autobuilder build (yocto-3.0.2.rc2)

A build flagged for QA (yocto-3.0.2.rc2) was completed on the autobuilder and is available at: https://autobuilder.yocto.io/pub/releases/yocto-3.0.2.rc2 Build hash information: bitbake: 95687be83e716220eb3893b67428f97fd59fc2c5 meta-gplv2: 0f4eecc000f66d114ad258fa31aed66afa292166 meta-in