It turns out writing the same list of packaging tasks multiple
times in multiple places is error prone. Move this to a new class
'nopackages", migrate existing users and add glibc-initial and
libgcc-initial since we don't want packages for those recipes.
This means the sstate for those recipes won't be installed, saving
small amounts of build time and bandwidth.
A reference to the old package_write task is also dropped.
(From OE-Core rev: cece583d58f82a50c3a4eac876eb326ac3b8f5e5)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Fixed race issue when build more than one gcc-source and inherit
rm_work, for example:
$ bitbake gcc-source-4.9.2 gcc-source-5.1.0
File "/path/to/bitbake/lib/bb/build.py", line 512, in exec_task
return _exec_task(fn, task, d, quieterr)
File "/path/to/bitbake/lib/bb/build.py", line 489, in _exec_task
make_stamp(task, localdata)
File "/path/to/bitbake/lib/bb/build.py", line 599, in make_stamp
os.unlink(name)
OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/path/to/tmp/stamps/work-shared/gcc-4.9.2-r0.do_rm_work_all.02cf1ed9b79d4edb0a51d3b913b7f9ba'
This is because make_stamp() uses glob.glob() to remove the old stamps
before create the new one, when gcc-source-5.1.0 removes gcc-4.9.2-r0's
stamp, we may get the error.
We can't use deltask do_rm_work_all as do_rm_work since it is a
recrdeptask, otherwise:
ERROR: Command execution failed: Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/path/to/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py", line 102, in runAsyncCommand
commandmethod(self.cmds_async, self, options)
File "/path/to/bitbake/lib/bb/command.py", line 324, in generateDotGraph
command.cooker.generateDotGraphFiles(pkgs_to_build, task)
File "/path/to/bitbake/lib/bb/cooker.py", line 847, in generateDotGraphFiles
depgraph = self.generateTaskDepTreeData(pkgs_to_build, task)
File "/path/to/bitbake/lib/bb/cooker.py", line 672, in generateTaskDepTreeData
rq.rqdata.prepare()
File "/path/to/bitbake/lib/bb/runqueue.py", line 587, in prepare
generate_recdeps(dep)
File "/path/to/bitbake/lib/bb/runqueue.py", line 575, in generate_recdeps
add_resolved_dependencies([taskData.tasks_fnid[t]], tasknames, newdeps)
TypeError: list indices must be integers, not NoneType
Update STAMPCLEAN to contain ${PV} to fix the problem.
(From OE-Core rev: 9099d46a46ee511d1b7e496472c5b973e8e8feaf)
Signed-off-by: Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Setting OE's PATH for the 'cd' command has no real effect.
In the normal case it has no effect for the gnu-configize command
either (since OE's PATH is already set in the context which runs
do_preconfigure) but it may be useful when manually re-running a
failed gnu-configize commandline copied from an error log, etc.
(From OE-Core rev: 4321fce801daea50baaaae9ed6a141c6e7712834)
Signed-off-by: Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
This means you can have one gcc version for some gcc recipes
(e.g. crosssdk/nativesdk) and another gcc version for target code.
Also remove the preferred version entry from the default toolchains
list since the version issue is now handled automatically.
We also need to specifically handle gcc-source in the license handling
code since expanding ${PV} in the base class isn't possible. Since
gcc-source doesn't generate any packages directly this shouldn't be
an issue and whitelisting in this way is easiest (and matches the
rest of the toolchain handling).
(From OE-Core rev: 67db7182faf6742b0d971d61d8c5ba34f69d2e12)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
gcc-source don't do do_package_write_rpm, so we should set
PACKAGES = "" to avoid the building error if we want generate srpm,
otherwise, we get the error as below.
ERROR: Task do_deploy_archives in meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-source_4.9.bb \
depends upon non-existent task do_package_write_rpm in \
meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-source_4.9.bb
(From OE-Core rev: 704fd8f1efbd7fa9368cfe4f956abf24cd58664e)
Signed-off-by: Bian Naimeng <biannm@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The current implementation of shared work for gcc is at best confusing. It relies
on the fetch/unpack/patch tasks having exactly the same stamps and if this gets
broken for some reason, its hard to figure out what the problem is. It also
leads to complex code in bitbake.
The benefits of shared work for gcc are clear but a better approach is needed. This
patch adjusts things so that a single new recipe (gcc-source) provides the
fetch/unpack/patch/preconfigure tasks, the rest of gcc simply depends on these tasks
and have no fetch/unpack/patch tasks of their own.
This means we should get the significant benefits (disk usage/performance) of the
single source tree but in a way which has less potential for problems and is
easier for people to understand. The cost is an extra recipe/some inc files
which is probably a good tradeoff.
(From OE-Core rev: ceaa0a448dc5ebddb4f7fb94fb8a503a1c0248c3)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Richard Purdie
Robert Yang
Andre McCurdy
Bian Naimeng