On Mon, 2015-07-27 at 09:20 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On 15-07-27 05:30 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > I've run a gcc 5.2 test build on the autobuilder: > > > > http://errors.yoctoproject.org/Errors/Search/?items=10&query=3628c3c06fa4195003ac655bcc791acfac775173&limit=50 > > > > 41 errors (with a few more pending). > > > > The good news is that if we tweak the security flags, the poky-lsb gcc, > > elfutils, coreutils and iptables issues can be removed and I have a > > patch for this. This leaves: > > > > 3.14 kernel failures for edgerouter, genericx86-64, qemuarm, beaglebone, > > mpc8315e-rdb > > Gah. I had all these building with 5.1 .. chasing gcc is a pain > with this older kernel.
I'm not sure if this is a 5.1 verses 5.2 issue or not. I'm starting to wonder if the SRCREVs we're using pull in the gcc 5.x fixes? E.g. one of the failures was: /home/pokybuild/yocto-autobuilder/yocto-worker/nightly-arm-lsb/build/build/tmp/work-shared/beaglebone/kernel-source/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h:106:30: fatal error: linux/compiler-gcc5.h: No such file or directory which doesn't look "5.2". > > Bruce: How do you want to handle the 3.14 issues? Switch to 4.1? or fix > > 3.14? > > Now that 4.1 is in place, and I can't really see a large user base that > needs gcc 5.x with the linux-yocto 3.14 kernel (other folks using > master with their own kernel's will obviously have to deal with the > issue in their trees) .. join that with the fact that we need to update > all the reference boards to 4.1 anyway, my suggestion is that we open > bugs for the h/w reference updates (and I'll get the appropriate Wind > River eyes on them) and walk away from burning more cycles on gcc 5.x > and the 3.14 kernel. That seems reasonable to me, assuming we don't have an easy SRCREV fix we've just missed/lost somehow... Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
