Thanks Ross,
I have added "EXTRA_OECONF += "--enable-shared", as asterisk needs shared
libraries: these don't get the suffix and asterisk builds fine.
I am still getting a whole slew of host contamination warnings, eg "pjproject:
/pjproject-staticdev/usr/lib/libpjsua-x86_64-poky-linux-gnu.a is owned by uid
1000, which is the same as the user running bitbake. This may be due to host
contamination". I can find some references to this happening in release tests
but not how it was fixed.
Can you shine any light on the "-fdebug-prefix-map" related fatal QA errors?
(leaking host paths) I've found some discussion in openembedded that suggests
this should be fixed in the compiler but again I am curious why this (very
simple) recipe has this issue but others don't.
The only 'odd' thing I've need to do is add "do_configure_prepend() { LD=$CXX }
If I get these recipes (asterisk/pjproject) to an acceptable level I could
propose them (back) into openembedded?
pjproject hasn't been touched for 6 years and has some custom steps I don't
understand
(https://github.com/openembedded/openembedded/tree/master/recipes/pjproject).
asterisk
(https://github.com/openembedded/openembedded/tree/master/recipes/asterisk) is
simarly out of date on openembedded, although there is also asterisk in
meta-telephony
(https://github.com/sysmocom/meta-telephony/tree/master/recipes-asterisk/asterisk)
that is referenced.
'My' asterisk recipe is based on the one from meta-telephony so I should get in
touch with the authors.
Regards,Chris
From: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 08:41:14 +0100
Subject: Re: [yocto] Build Errors with new recipe for pjproject
(autotools/pkgconfig)
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected]
On 27 April 2016 at 07:27, Chris Trobridge <[email protected]> wrote:
Aside from the issues I mentioned previously, pjproject is detecting
cross-compilation and this causes it to append '-x86_64-poky-linux-gnu' to all
its library names.
This is then breaking autotools configuration in other recipes that are testing
for the base name.
Is it common for a build process to differentiate cross compiled libraries like
this? Is there a preferred way to deal with it?
No, that's rather unusual. Typically you'd just have a different libdir per
architecture.
Ross
--
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
