Hi Nicolas, You were indeed correct with the string comparison being at fault, it should be doing a '==' instead of 'in'.
I have already submitted the patch to bitbake, and it appears to have already been accepted, and also has trickled down to Poky. http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/bitbake-devel/2013-November/004170.html http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=f91a3f46a1ee586e330be0868e8fbc4d2e78d361 Thanks, Nathan > -----Original Message----- > From: Nicolas Dechesne [mailto:nicolas.deche...@linaro.org] > Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2013 6:02 PM > To: Nathan Rossi > Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; meta-xilinx Mailing List (meta- > xil...@yoctoproject.org) > Subject: Re: [yocto] Patch failure with bbappends > > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Nathan Rossi <nathan.ro...@xilinx.com> > wrote: > > > Reverting this commit on the top of master results in a functional > build. I've done some 'bitbake -e' scanning with and without the above > commit, and I cannot see any differences between the variables that are > changed in the meta-xilinx .bbappends files. So it does not appear to be a > problem in non-inclusion of the bbappend files, and the ordering of the > inclusion appears to be correct as well. > > Before I dive any deeper into the bitbake change itself I was hoping > someone might have seen this issue previously or has some insight. > > > > just a wild guess... but could it be because gcc-cross and gcc-cross- > initial both start with 'gcc-cross', hence the regexp in this new commit > is catching them twice? i am referring to this: > > - if f in self.appendlist: > - return self.appendlist[f] > - return [] > + for bbappend in self.appendlist: > + if bbappend in f or ('%' in bbappend and > bbappend.startswith(f[:bbappend.index('%')])): > + self.appliedappendlist.append(bbappend) > + for filename in self.appendlist[bbappend]: > + filelist.append(filename) _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto