On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Mark Hatle <mark.ha...@windriver.com> wrote: >> On 8/4/15 12:25 PM, Bystricky, Juro wrote: >>> I agree, the name "kernel-headers" may not be the most fortunate, >>> "linux-headers" >>> is probably more fitting. The recipe installs the files in a similar >>> fashion that is done by >>> >>> apt-get install linux-headers-$(uname -r) >>> >>> Typical contents can be viewed for example here: >>> https://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/i686/linux-headers/ >>> >>> These files are needed to allow building of kernel drivers against the >>> running >>> Linux kernel. In a way, it is a subset of kernel-devsrc, but including >>> ".config" file used for the actual running kernel. >> >> Again this is part of the purpose of the existing kernel-devsrc package. So >> what is missing preventing this from working. It likely needs to be added to >> the kernel-devsrc package instead (or a sub package that is created by the >> kernel-devsrc recipe.) > > Peeking in on vacation. > > At a minimum, we need to figure out why the existing package wasn't > able to build the use case in question here .. I've built pretty much > everything > against it at one point .. so I'd like to learn more. > > And yes, what we don't need is more sets of rules that copy and package > parts of the kernel build. We are already doing that in our do_shared_workdir > and that is pretty much the minimum to build against the kernel. If that > directory structure needs more for this purpose (or less), then update it. > > But we need to do all of this in the existing classes, to keep everything in > one place, not more recipes that are grabbing chunks of the same source > tree.
FYI: exiting thoughts are here: https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7095 So as you can see, we aren't offended by a 'headers' package, but it has to make sense with the existing packages, and needs to be generating from our existing bits of the system. Cheers, Bruce > > Bruce > > >> >>> Having these files installed, it is possible to compile additional >>> kernel drivers that are not part of the kernel-devsrc . >>> VirtualBox compiles some of their own drivers this way, others as well. >>> There are many other scenarios where you may want to add a new kernel >>> driver to an already installed Linux kernel. >> >> Yes, this was part of the design behind the kernel-devsrc, make sure the >> sources >> and components used to build the running kernel were made available to the >> target so that out-of-tree/external kernel modules could be built to match >> the >> running system -- as well as the ability to reconfigure and rebuild the >> kernel >> itself. >> >> Bruce is on vacation this week and may not be around to respond, but adding >> yet >> another package is not the right answer here. Lets fix what may be broken in >> what we have. >> >> --Mark >> >>> Juro >>> >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Mark Hatle [mailto:mark.ha...@windriver.com] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2015 9:20 AM >>>> To: Bystricky, Juro; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; >>>> jurobystri...@hotmail.com >>>> Cc: Purdie, Richard >>>> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] Support for VirtualBox guest additions >>>> >>>> On 8/3/15 3:35 PM, Juro Bystricky wrote: >>>>> In order to support VirtualBox guest additions, kernel headers need to >>>>> be present in the VM. I am aware we already have two packages/recipes >>>>> that are somewhat similar (kernel-devsrc.bb, linux-libc-headers), but none >>>> of them is suitable for this purpose. >>>>> Besides the kernel headers, some additional files (scripts, Makefiles, >>>>> .config, etc) are also required. >>>> >>>> linux-libc-headers is only for building applications. kernel-devsrc is for >>>> building modules on the target. >>>> >>>> What do these specific modules need that are not present in kernel-devsrc? >>>> (I really don't want 'yet another' confusing package added to the system.) >>>> >>>>> The new recipe "kernel-headers.bb" can in principle be used by other >>>> images as well. >>>>> It is not limited to the Build Appliance and hence is not a part of >>>>> the Build Appliance recipe. >>>> >>>> I think kernel-headers is a bad name for a package. It could be confusing. >>>> >>>> --Mark >>>> >>>>> Juro Bystricky (2): >>>>> kernel-headers: linux kernel headers >>>>> build-appliance-image: support for VirtualBox guest addtions >>>>> >>>>> .../README_vbox_guest_additions.txt | 78 >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> .../images/build-appliance-image_12.0.1.bb | 4 +- >>>>> meta/recipes-kernel/linux/kernel-headers.bb | 66 >>>> ++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 3 files changed, 147 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 >>>>> meta/recipes-core/images/build-appliance- >>>> image/README_vbox_guest_addit >>>>> ions.txt create mode 100644 >>>>> meta/recipes-kernel/linux/kernel-headers.bb >>>>> >>> >> >> -- >> _______________________________________________ >> Openembedded-core mailing list >> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org >> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > > > > -- > "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await > thee at its end" -- "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.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
