Hi Bruce, Yeah, that's the avenue I'm going to have to go down. I was hoping to avoid the trial by fire approach and learn by making small mods to an existing working build, but it looks like that might not be in the cards. I was hoping that one of the at91/linux4sam people or someone familiar with meta-atmel might be lurking in here and have seen the same issue when following the instructions in the layer's README file and have a "oh yeah, just tweak this..." fix.
I'll have to take a look through some of the linux-yocto-custom log files to see where the .config is getting generated from and whether the defconfig from the BSP kernel recipe is playing a roll in it. I'm guessing without an explicit board file (which there isn't) and the CONFIG_MACH_AT91SAM9_DT parameter not making its way from defconfig to the .config, that would explain why there is no machine record macro being declared. I'll keep digging... Thanks, Brian -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Ashfield [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2014 2:42 PM To: Brian Karcz; [email protected] Subject: Re: [yocto] [meta-atmel] at91sam9x5ek: "no machine record defined" failure for core-image-minimal The reason I asked is that in the past, the error you are seeing was related to the machine not being properly defined in the kernel's .config. FWIW, assuming you have a full "defconfig", and not a "save_defconfig" variant, the path from it to the final .config is pretty much a copy into the kernel and a "make oldconfig", so nothing is thrown away unless there is a missing dependency, or the Kconfig doesn't exist in the given kernel. It's worth checking via menuconfig to see if anything obvious is missing, and trying some quick builds to rule out a bad configuration. Bruce -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
