On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 11:26 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >> I wasn't clear, I'm building the tree (and tools) standalone using >> both a hand generated cross toolchain and the native toolchain. Neither >> uses a sysroot, so if I merged that patch into the tree, then they >> wouldn't find slang and the build breaks. > > I'm not sure you want that hand generated cross toolchain finding slang > in that location, but anyhow... :) > >> > It would be nice to not have to guess at what the problem is though... >> >> Sorry about that, 400 unread email have me moving quickly this morning >> and not taking enough time to put all the detail into what I am >> writing. I added that above. And yes, it is some older RHEL/Suse boxes >> and other ones that are derived from non debian systems that give me >> pain. > > Ok, I understand the problem now. > >> > We had the autobuilder showing read for 5 days with radio silence and >> > admittedly some confusion over a patch status. What am I meant to do >> > given I'd really like to take the vacation I have planned this week? >> >> Sorry, I thought when Liang sent the patch the issue was resolved :( >> We at least did. That's how it goes sometimes. > > Right, some of it is misunderstanding and bad timing etc. but I needed > to do something. I agree its suboptimal but its a better position for > OE-Core than we were in and we can recover from it. > >> > Anyhow, lets see if we can resolve this. Can you answer my previous >> > question about whether changing this to -I=/usr/include/slang would >> > work? >> >> It should, but there's a distinct lack of precedent for sysroot style >> include paths in the kernel tools (behind the times), but in the end, >> if it fixes the oe-core case, and doesn't break standalone builds >> (the toolchain just has to no error on the syntax), it should be fine. >> >> I've already asked that a full kernel fix be generated, but I don't think >> it will make the deadline for your vacation, or M3, so merging a sysroot >> based include is probably the reasonable middle ground that I'll end >> on. > > Lets try the sysroot prefix (=) approach then. The kernel is sparse on > these since it never actually has to deal with sysroots (or userspace) > often and is still learning in that area. I suspect this should be the > fix upstream might take.
Agreed. And to close the loop, I'd prefer to leave what you merged as-is for today, and by next week, have another pull request with an in tree and upstream submitted patch to replace it. Does that work for you ? Bruce > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core -- "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end" _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
