On Tue, 2025-02-04 at 11:37 +0100, Mathieu Othacehe via lists.openembedded.org wrote: > > diff --git a/meta/lib/oe/package.py b/meta/lib/oe/package.py > index 1af10b7eb0..468f331fce 100644 > --- a/meta/lib/oe/package.py > +++ b/meta/lib/oe/package.py > @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ import shutil > > import oe.cachedpath > > -def runstrip(arg): > +def runstrip(arg, keep_sections='', extra_strip_sections=''): > # Function to strip a single file, called from split_and_strip_files > below > # A working 'file' (one which works on the target architecture) > # > @@ -27,12 +27,7 @@ def runstrip(arg): > # 4 - executable > # 8 - shared library > # 16 - kernel module > - > - if len(arg) == 3: > - (file, elftype, strip) = arg > - extra_strip_sections = '' > - else: > - (file, elftype, strip, extra_strip_sections) = arg > + (file, elftype, strip) = arg > > newmode = None > if not os.access(file, os.W_OK) or os.access(file, os.R_OK):
One of the reasons this has stayed as pending was this messy argument passing, which I appreciate is pre-existing code. I've sent a patch which cleans it up a bit and this patch will need rebasing on top of it. That should at least make things cleaner. I'm still a bit unsure what to do with the stripping changes this patch makes. One concern I worry about is having "magic" options users need to know to set. The other is whether there is really a binutils type bug underlying this and that there really should be a fix made somewhere else. I don't know enough about the issue to be sure whether there is an underlying issue though... Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#212016): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/212016 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/110989612/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
