On 2 May 2013 14:16, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> It's just my observation that there seems to be a discrepancy between
> what is getting built and packaged. Things get built in ./lib and
> packaged from ./lib64.
It looks like yajl is hard-coding "lib" but presumably your machine
configuration wants t
yajl/libyajl is a dependeny I have for another package I'm trying to
build so I'm not touching the yajl recipe at all. In fact the
complete recipe is this:
-
DESCRIPTION = "Yet Another JSON Library - A Portable JSON parsing and serializat
LICENSE = "MIT"
LIC_FILES_
On Thursday 02 May 2013 10:24:10 Burton, Ross wrote:
> On 1 May 2013 20:11, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> >FILES_yajl="/usr/bin/* /usr/sbin/* /usr/lib64/yajl/* ...
> >
> > Ho do I get the yajl recipe to either a) build the files in lib64 or
> > b) package them from lib.
>
> Don't hard-code paths, in
On 1 May 2013 20:11, Stuart Yoder wrote:
>FILES_yajl="/usr/bin/* /usr/sbin/* /usr/lib64/yajl/* ...
>
> Ho do I get the yajl recipe to either a) build the files in lib64 or
> b) package them from lib.
Don't hard-code paths, instead use the symbols available in bitbake.conf:
FILES_yajl = "${bi
The yajl package (from meta-oe) is a dependency for another package
I'm building, but am getting an error on 64-bit targets where libyajl
is missing.
I noticed this when running bitbake with -v
> [cut]
> Checking for unpackaged file(s):
> /local/home/b08248/Work/sdk-devel/build_p5020ds-
> 64b_re
