I'm seeing that this builds patch-native (to be able to patch busybox) and its dependencies (quilt/autoconf/automake). If this has been working differently before, bisecting to the point where it changed would be very appreciated.
Alex On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 09:55, Valek, Andrej <andrej.va...@siemens.com> wrote: > > Hello Richard and Alex, > > Richard: > We tried to revert the commits which you mentioned and it didn't work. > > Alex: > Yes, is fully reproducible on latest master. > > bitbake core-image-minimal -c populate_sdk_ext > > eSDK installed via: poky-glibc-x86_64-core-image-minimal-cortexa15t2hf- > neon-qemuarm-toolchain-ext-4.1+snapshot.sh > > . environment-setup-cortexa15t2hf-neon-poky-linux-gnueabi > devtool modify busybox > > Sstate summary: Wanted 14 Local 0 Mirrors 0 Missed 14 Current 6 (0% > match, 30% complete) > > So it started a compilation of missing components. We are assuming, > that eSDK will include all build deps for all components in the image > and not just a deps for image itself. > > > Regards, > Andrej > > On Mon, 2022-06-27 at 14:35 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Mon, 2022-06-27 at 12:32 +0000, Valek, Andrej wrote: > > > I have a question related to eSDK dependencies. We're using the > > > dunfell > > > branch were everything related to this eSDK topic works fine. Now > > > we're > > > in the transition phase to new LTS branch, where were we found one > > > big > > > difference between eSDKs. > > > > > > The old variant (dunfell) includes all application build > > > dependencies, > > > but the new variant (kirkstone/master) doesn't. Means if I > > > installed > > > the eSDK and used "devtool modify my-app" (application installed on > > > the > > > image) it works without any additional build deps recompilation. > > > But now, if I do the same on the newer version it always recompile > > > all > > > build deps. > > > I was already looked, what could be changed, but I didn't find so > > > far > > > something suspicious. So the question is, what has been changed, > > > and > > > how to bring the old variant back? > > > > Guessing is hard. Since you're asking me to guess: > > > > https://git.yoctoproject.org/poky/commit/?id=568f62214bca3ac6d35eef8d9f4562596fb4c9ab > > > > which was partially reverted here: > > > > https://git.yoctoproject.org/poky/commit/?id=f22e1fbdf7bed111e080d176fe5a39c5139308ed > > > > maybe? It could be something else. It wasn't a specific change to > > remove such dependencies but I suspect it could have happened as an > > unforeseen side effect of something else. > > > > You may need to come up with a simple test case and then bisect > > between > > the two releases to see which change it was. Once we understand what > > change caused it, working out a solution would be easier, it is > > premature to even try without knowing the cause. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Richard > > > > > > > > >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#167335): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/167335 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/92019337/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
