From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([93.97.175.187]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U5G3h-0003lM-IZ for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:38:12 +0100 Received: from localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id r1CDRvZ2023628; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:27:57 GMT X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at dan.rpsys.net Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id tsSTxx5lmRkc; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:27:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.3.10] (rpvlan0 [192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id r1CDRqRH023621 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:27:54 GMT Message-ID: <1360675313.30425.14.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Bruce Ashfield Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:21:53 +0000 In-Reply-To: References: <510C0FF1.2010400@linux.intel.com> <5110A9D1.20208@windriver.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.3-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Zhenfeng.Zhao@windriver.com, Patches, oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] busybox: add config fragments X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:38:13 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 11:29 -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:42 AM, ChenQi wrote: > On 02/02/2013 03:08 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Saul Wold > > wrote: > > On 02/01/2013 06:18 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:00 AM, > > > > wrote: > > > > > Both the implementation and the use case > > are similar to yocto kernel's > > configuration fragments. > > I can fairly easily tweak the configuration > > parts of the kern-tools to > > handle this > > use case as well. That would allow us to > > re-use the kernel's merge_config.sh > > script (with a minor dependency change) and > > save some duplicated code. It > > also gets you the advantage that you can > > consolidate configuration fragments > > outside of any build system, which isn't as > > critical here, but something > > that > > is used quite a bit during kernel testing. > > Bruce, > > > > Where is the merge_config.sh script today? Would > > you propose moving it to the scripts dir and have > > the busybox recipe call it? > > > > > > It's part of the mainline kernel, hence why grabbing the > > guts out of it reproducing > > it here isn't the best idea, we'll have a need to keep them > > in sync. In fact, I have > > 2 or 3 pending patches for it in the kern-tools repository > > that I need to get upstream > > (as an example). > > > > > > I'd propose either creating a separate recipe for it (i.e. > > like kconfig-frontends) or I could > > keep it in kern-tools (badly named, but we can work on > > that ;) and maintain / coordinate > > changes to it. > > > > > > I just don't want to see the effort happen twice, we are > > busy enough! > > > > > > What would be your timing on making such a change, > > ie hold this patch until your get it merge or merge > > this and then fix it when you merge your changes? > > > I could feasibly get it done in the next few weeks, the > > changes aren't bug, I just > > have to avoid regressions on either side (kernel or busy > > box). > > > That being said, the interface to the SRC_URI is the same > > for the two, so if we are > > ok with me arriving and removing the in-recipe support, I > > guess I can't object too > > much :) The only risk is that if anyone starts using this > > first support immediately, > > I do risk regressing their use case, where if it never goes > > in, that won't happen. > > > Cheers, > > Bruce > > Hi Bruce, > > I just tried to reuse the kernel's merge_config.sh script, and > it turned out well. > The patch is in attachment. > > Is it enough for now? > > Yep, this is enough for now. It re-uses the significant part of the > infrastructure, which > is the important part. Once it is in tree, I can refine the dependency > and some other > minor modifications. > > Feel free to add my Signed-off-by: to the patch as well. This patch triggers a failure on the autobuilder: http://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org:8010/builders/p1022ds/builds/246/steps/shell_59/logs/stdio (its reproducible, this is the second one now) I suspect there is a missing DEPENDS += "kern-tools-native". You'd be able to reproduce this with a: bitbake busybox kern-tools-native; bitbake busybox kern-tools-native -c clean; bitbake busybox Cheers, Richard