Hi Paul,
On 24 Aug 2011, at 12:11, Paul Eggleton wrote:
Hi Chris,
On Wednesday 24 August 2011 08:59:15 Chris Tapp wrote:
bitbake doesn't seem to be detecting missing patch files. In
a .bbappend file (for linux-wrs_git) I have:
SRC_URI += " file://defconfig"
SRC_URI_append_Vortex86DX = "\
file://there-is-no.patch;patch=1 "
FYI patch=1 is no longer necessary as of quite some time ago -
the .patch (or
.diff) extension is enough to indicate that it's a patch.
It seems as if it's this that's causing the problem. I had a 'real'
patch file in place and it wasn't being processed during do_unpack.
Removing the 'patch=1' fixed this and it was processed as expected. It
seems as if adding the 'patch=1' to the file means it's not used as a
file or patch and is simply ignored, which would explain what I was
seeing. A 'missing' file without 'patch=1' is reported as an error.
bitbake -c patch -f virtual/kernel
runs without reporting any errors, even though linux-wrs_Vortex86DX/
does not contain 'there-is-no.patch'.
Are you sure there is no patch of this name elsewhere in the search
path for
this recipe? This is buggy behaviour if there isn't. (bitbake -e
linux-wrs |
grep "^FILESPATH" will give you the entire path it is using.) In any
case the
directory it should search for the patch in is linux-wrs/Vortex86DX
not linux-
wrs_Vortex86DX.
I'm certain - I made this file name up specially for testing ;-)
My, doesn't FILESPATH get complicated !
I'd also recommend for consistency if it's not too difficult to
change at this
point that you use an all-lowercase machine name.
Easily done, as this is only experimental at the moment. I'll try and
remember to change it when I finish later on so I can run a complete
rebuild over night.
Thanks for the pointer.
Chris Tapp
[email protected]
www.keylevel.com
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
