From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68E8DE003E3 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 09:35:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Feb 2012 09:35:54 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,352,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="109370977" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.123.6]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Feb 2012 09:35:53 -0800 From: Paul Eggleton To: yocto@yoctoproject.org Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 17:35:52 +0000 Message-ID: <2046170.9fCjTlmZqN@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.8.0 (Linux/3.0.0-16-generic-pae; KDE/4.8.0; i686; ; ) MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: pseudo interaction issue X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 17:35:54 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi all, I'm trying to extend buildhistory to write out the metadata revisions just before it does the commit to the buildhistory repository, and I'm having some pseudo-related trouble. The structure is a little unusual, in that the execution flow is an event handler that calls a shell function (via bb.build.exec_func()) and during parsing this function an ${@...} reference to a python function is evaluated, which then calls os.popen(), at which point I get the error "pseudo: You must set the PSEUDO_PREFIX environment variable to run pseudo." I don't need pseudo at this stage. I've tried setting PSEUDO_DISABLED=1 and even PSEUDO_UNLOAD=1 just prior to the os.popen() call (or within it) and despite evidence that pseudo is taking notice of these being set in other contexts (when the function is called from elsewhere) even when doing this I still get the error above. I could rearrange the structure to avoid this execution flow however that would bar me from reusing existing code that we have for getting the metadata revision. Any suggestions? Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre