On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 5:45 AM Patrick Vacek <patrick.va...@here.com> wrote:
>
> On 12.06.2018 00:48, Andre McCurdy wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 2:42 AM, Patrick Vacek <patrick.va...@here.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On 08.06.2018 10:26, Khem Raj wrote:
> >>> On 6/8/18 12:27 AM, Patrick Vacek wrote:
> >>>> On 07.06.2018 19:06, Khem Raj wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 2:01 AM, Patrick Vacek
> >>>>> <patrick.va...@here.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> I have a recipe (aktualizr-hsm-prov) that depends on another
> >>>>>> (aktualizr)
> >>>>>> to provide an executable and a config file. The former recipe includes
> >>>>>> `DEPENDS = "aktualizr-native"`, and my do_install() for
> >>>>>> aktualizr-hsm-prov has a line something like this:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> aktualizr -i ${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}${libdir}/sota.conf
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The binary executable (aktualizr) runs, which tells me that the recipe
> >>>>>> can find that. (Although to be honest, I'm not sure which version
> >>>>>> it is
> >>>>>> running.) However, it doesn't find the config file, and sure enough,
> >>>>>> ${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}${libdir} does not have the config file I
> >>>>>> expect. I
> >>>>>> can see that aktualizr-native is populating its sysroot-destdir,
> >>>>>> but it
> >>>>>> isn't getting copied to the sysroot for aktualizr-hsm-prov.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I see this problem in sumo and master, although previously this logic
> >>>>>> has worked just fine in morty/pyro/rocko.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What am I doing wrong? What changed between rocko and sumo?
> >>> Can you check location of sota.conf in the build tree for
> >>> aktualizr-native in directory called package/
> >> Oddly, I do not see a package subdirectory inside the aktualizr-native
> >> directory in the build tree. I do see it inside the aktualizr directory,
> >> though, and it contains everything that I would expect. Is there some
> >> sort of configuration of the packaging system for a native recipe that I
> >> haven't done correctly?
> > No, what you see is expected - there's no packaging for -native recipes.
> >
> > Back to the original problem, I think you should consider the
> > aktualizr executable and the sota.conf file as two separate things.
> > The host executable should always be provided by aktualizr-native.
> > It's less clear what should provide sota.conf - it depends whether
> > it's just required for building other recipes (ie like a header file)
> > or whether it needs to be present in the final rootfs? If it's only
> > required for building other packages, then it should be in the -dev
> > package for aktualizr. If it needs to be present in the final rootfs
> > then it should be in the default package for aktualizr. Either way,
> > recipes which need to find sota.conf in sysroot would then depend on
> > "aktualizr". Therefore recipes which need both the host executable and
> > sota.conf in sysroot should depend on both aktualizr and
> > aktualizr-native.
> Actually, after some further research, it appears that my problem is not
> entirely resolved. The explanation of packaging and native vs. target
> dependencies all makes sense to me and usually works. However, this is
> not the case for one specific condition which happens to be part of my
> test suite.
>
> One of my tests is to change the MACHINE in my local.conf, add some
> additional layers, change some other variables, and then bitbake. Then I
> undo that and bitbake again. For the most part, that works fine. In
> rocko and before, it worked consistently. But it seems like on sumo and
> master, when I do the test by changing the MACHINE and the layers, it
> somehow clears out everything in my recipe's work directory, despite
> that that recipe is not used by that test. In fact, it removes every
> single file in tmp/work/core2-64-poky-linux (but leaves most of the
> directories). When I switch back to how it was before and bitbake, most
> of the files get recreated or re-copied, but not all. I have to
> explicitly run `bitbake -c cleanall aktualizr aktualizr-hsm-prov` to get
> things to work again. (Perhaps cleanall isn't necessary, but some form
> of cleaning is, and it has to be both recipes.)
>
> Can someone help explain why I am seeing this behavior? I don't
> understand why the files get erased, why they don't get repopulated, and
> why this was different back in rocko.
>
when machine and other variables are changed then its mostly
resulting in hash changes which is enforcing it to rebuild and when
rebuild happens it will clear the recipe specific build area for that
given recipe and repopulate it as it has to rebuild/repackage it since
this time it will get most of build artifacts from shared state as it
has been bullt with same hash once before. so it will most probably be
re-using that.
If doing clean build is helping then this might mean that they
are not staging all the files that you depend on. When you do
clean build they get staged into build area during compile phase and
it silently uses it. So ensure that all files you need are accounted
for in do_install
> Thanks!
> Patrick
>
--
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
