Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On 04/25/2013 06:30 PM, Trevor Woerner wrote: On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote: On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 18:06 -0400, Trevor Woerner wrote: On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: ok, so what am i looking for? I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image, but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a danny-8.0.1 problem). https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else tried reproducing it. I believe I tried and couldn't reproduce it. But if someone does reproduce it, please file a bug detailing the *exact* steps needed to reproduce. https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4423 This is still reproducible. This time I also gave it a try using a Fedora 18 (64) VM. Lab 3 does not work if you set PACKAGE_CLASSES to package_ipk. Thanks, if there is any context missing from the bug, please add it there. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote: On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 18:06 -0400, Trevor Woerner wrote: On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: ok, so what am i looking for? I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image, but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a danny-8.0.1 problem). https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else tried reproducing it. I believe I tried and couldn't reproduce it. But if someone does reproduce it, please file a bug detailing the *exact* steps needed to reproduce. https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4423 This is still reproducible. This time I also gave it a try using a Fedora 18 (64) VM. Lab 3 does not work if you set PACKAGE_CLASSES to package_ipk. ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Tom Zanussi wrote: On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 11:41 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on kernel labs described here: https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course, so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this road. start with lab 1. the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing dependencies on those two layers in a new layer? The bblayers.conf for the labs is just the bblayers.conf that gets generated the first time you source oe-init-build-env in poky, which is what the lab is based on. You shouldn't need those layers - the BSPs should work fine outside of poky, but since this is a yocto lab and it uses poky, there's no need to make a point of removing them - actually, I haven't tried removing those layers - meta-yocto-bsp could certainly be removed since it's all machine-specific to existing BSPs, but it's easy enough to remove them and see... i took them out since i'm a minimalist -- i really like to strip out anything that doesn't need to be there to avoid any unexpected side effects. so far, doesn't seem to have made a difference, and i didn't expect it to. to lab 2. and beyond! rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
Hi Robert, Since you're working your way through the labs, I was wondering if you'd be interested in testing something out for me? When I went through these labs I had set my PACKAGE_CLASSES to package_ipk instead of the default package_rpm. While doing so I had discovered a bug which I reported, but nobody else (to my knowledge) tried to reproduce the issue. Would you mind working through the labs with package_ipk and seeing if there are some things that don't work as advertised? Best regards, Trevor ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Trevor Woerner wrote: Hi Robert, Since you're working your way through the labs, I was wondering if you'd be interested in testing something out for me? When I went through these labs I had set my PACKAGE_CLASSES to package_ipk instead of the default package_rpm. While doing so I had discovered a bug which I reported, but nobody else (to my knowledge) tried to reproduce the issue. Would you mind working through the labs with package_ipk and seeing if there are some things that don't work as advertised? does this mean PACKAGE_CLASSES should be *exclusively* ipk, or that ipk simply be in there? rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: does this mean PACKAGE_CLASSES should be *exclusively* ipk, or that ipk simply be in there? Yes, that's how I had been testing it (exclusively package_ipk). ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Trevor Woerner wrote: On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: does this mean PACKAGE_CLASSES should be *exclusively* ipk, or that ipk simply be in there? Yes, that's how I had been testing it (exclusively package_ipk). well, at the moment, that's what local.conf contains, so i'm just using the default i got when i created a new project. at least that was the default for lab 1. should i expect that to change in a later lab? rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Trevor Woerner wrote: Hi Robert, Since you're working your way through the labs, I was wondering if you'd be interested in testing something out for me? When I went through these labs I had set my PACKAGE_CLASSES to package_ipk instead of the default package_rpm. While doing so I had discovered a bug which I reported, but nobody else (to my knowledge) tried to reproduce the issue. Would you mind working through the labs with package_ipk and seeing if there are some things that don't work as advertised? ok, so what am i looking for? rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: ok, so what am i looking for? I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image, but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a danny-8.0.1 problem). https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else tried reproducing it. This might be of interest to anyone still using danny. ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 18:06 -0400, Trevor Woerner wrote: On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: ok, so what am i looking for? I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image, but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a danny-8.0.1 problem). https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else tried reproducing it. I believe I tried and couldn't reproduce it. But if someone does reproduce it, please file a bug detailing the *exact* steps needed to reproduce. Thanks, Tom This might be of interest to anyone still using danny. ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Tom Zanussi wrote: On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 18:06 -0400, Trevor Woerner wrote: On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: ok, so what am i looking for? I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image, but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a danny-8.0.1 problem). https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else tried reproducing it. I believe I tried and couldn't reproduce it. But if someone does reproduce it, please file a bug detailing the *exact* steps needed to reproduce. h ... for fun, i'm using HEAD for everything so i might avoid it entirely. if i have time, i'll give it a shot. rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote: I believe I tried and couldn't reproduce it. But if someone does reproduce it, please file a bug detailing the *exact* steps needed to reproduce. Thanks for the update, I wasn't 100% sure if you had found the time to give it a try or not. I'll give it another whirl since I'm thinking about it and see where I get. ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Trevor Woerner wrote: On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: ok, so what am i looking for? I couldn't get lab3 to work fully unless I switched from package_ipk to package_rpm. The module would get built and included in the image, but it wasn't being loaded automatically during boot. At the time I tried against the master HEAD and everything worked fine, so whatever it is I think I've found, it has been fixed (this is only a danny-8.0.1 problem). https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-February/014424.html When I mentioned it, it didn't seem to make sense that the choice of packaging should affect something like this. But I tried it a couple times on my machine and could reproduce it. I don't think anyone else tried reproducing it. This might be of interest to anyone still using danny. so, did you say you were going to try to reproduce this? i don't want to spend time poking around this if it turns out even *you* can't make it happen again. :-) rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On 13-04-08 11:41 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on kernel labs described here: https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course, so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this road. start with lab 1. the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing dependencies on those two layers in a new layer? also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces: ERROR: QA Issue: /home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb: Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this. is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the lab as part of an exercise? just curious. Probably not deliberate, the kernel labs aren't about packaging. Which branch are you using for your tests ? Even if it's an old release branch, there may have been some QA backports between the time the lab was done, and the time you are running it. Bruce rday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Bruce Ashfield wrote: On 13-04-08 11:41 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on kernel labs described here: https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course, so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this road. start with lab 1. the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing dependencies on those two layers in a new layer? also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces: ERROR: QA Issue: /home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb: Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this. is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the lab as part of an exercise? just curious. Probably not deliberate, the kernel labs aren't about packaging. Which branch are you using for your tests ? Even if it's an old release branch, there may have been some QA backports between the time the lab was done, and the time you are running it. i'm using HEAD for everything, even though the labs dictate poky-danny-8.0.1; if anything breaks because of that, i'll make a note of it. rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On 13-04-08 12:02 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Bruce Ashfield wrote: On 13-04-08 11:41 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on kernel labs described here: https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course, so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this road. start with lab 1. the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing dependencies on those two layers in a new layer? also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces: ERROR: QA Issue: /home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb: Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this. is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the lab as part of an exercise? just curious. Probably not deliberate, the kernel labs aren't about packaging. Which branch are you using for your tests ? Even if it's an old release branch, there may have been some QA backports between the time the lab was done, and the time you are running it. i'm using HEAD for everything, even though the labs dictate poky-danny-8.0.1; if anything breaks because of that, i'll make a note of it. That's what I wondered. These were all done against 1.3, so the QA warning (and other issues you'll see) are very likely caused by this skew. For the next round of conferences, there are plans to update them to use 1.4 and get required cleanup. Bruce rday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Bruce Ashfield wrote: On 13-04-08 12:02 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Bruce Ashfield wrote: On 13-04-08 11:41 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on kernel labs described here: https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course, so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this road. start with lab 1. the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing dependencies on those two layers in a new layer? also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces: ERROR: QA Issue: /home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb: Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this. is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the lab as part of an exercise? just curious. Probably not deliberate, the kernel labs aren't about packaging. Which branch are you using for your tests ? Even if it's an old release branch, there may have been some QA backports between the time the lab was done, and the time you are running it. i'm using HEAD for everything, even though the labs dictate poky-danny-8.0.1; if anything breaks because of that, i'll make a note of it. That's what I wondered. These were all done against 1.3, so the QA warning (and other issues you'll see) are very likely caused by this skew. For the next round of conferences, there are plans to update them to use 1.4 and get required cleanup. okey dokey. rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] working my way through the kernel hands-on labs finally
On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 11:41 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: finally have the time to work my way through the ELC 2013 hands on kernel labs described here: https://www.yoctoproject.org/tools-resources/presentations/working-kernel since i'll almost certainly use some of them in my next yocto course, so the occasional question for anyone who's already been down this road. start with lab 1. the doc mentions including the meta-yocto and meta-yocto-bsp layers -- are those strictly necessary? the layer.conf definition file for the lab1 layer doesn't list those layers as dependencies. what will happen if i leave them out? what's the policy on explicitly listing dependencies on those two layers in a new layer? The bblayers.conf for the labs is just the bblayers.conf that gets generated the first time you source oe-init-build-env in poky, which is what the lab is based on. You shouldn't need those layers - the BSPs should work fine outside of poky, but since this is a yocto lab and it uses poky, there's no need to make a point of removing them - actually, I haven't tried removing those layers - meta-yocto-bsp could certainly be removed since it's all machine-specific to existing BSPs, but it's easy enough to remove them and see... also, just doing a basic fetch for lab1 produces: ERROR: QA Issue: /home/rpjday/yocto/k_lab/layers/meta-lab1-qemux86/recipes-kernel/linux/linux_3.0.18.bb: Variable FILES is set as not being package specific, please fix this. is that deliberate? something that will be resolved later in the lab as part of an exercise? just curious. The labs are and should be targeted to a specific release for exactly the reason you just discovered - in this case, the main metadata promoted various QA Issues into errors immediately following the release. In this case you were lucky and hit an example of something obvious, most of the time it's not that obvious - basically if you do anything outside of what's specified in the labs, especially working from master, all bets are off... Tom rday ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
