[2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steffen Sledz]

In the last days we switched our local development from an older oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying problem.

The test builds on various developer machines were successful but the build on our continuous integration server (with exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of

|  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following dependencies for lighttpd:
|  *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *         libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *
|  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.

errors.

After some searching we found that there was no libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.

I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).

Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.

Any ideas?

PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image wors as a workaround for us at the moment.

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steffen Sledz]

On 04.08.2011 08:29, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> In the last days we switched our local development from an older oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying problem.
> 
> The test builds on various developer machines were successful but the build on our continuous integration server (with exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of
> 
> |  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following dependencies for lighttpd:
> |  *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *         libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *
> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.
> 
> errors.
> 
> After some searching we found that there was no libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.
> 
> I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).
> 
> Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image wors as a workaround for us at the moment.

Another collegue had a similar problem while bitbaking meta-toolchain.

|  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following dependencies for task-sdk-bare:
|  * 	libstdc++-dev *
|  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package task-sdk-bare.

So it seems it is not a problem of our image recipe.

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steffen Sledz]

On 04.08.2011 08:29, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> In the last days we switched our local development from an older oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying problem.
> 
> The test builds on various developer machines were successful but the build on our continuous integration server (with exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of
> 
> |  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following dependencies for lighttpd:
> |  *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *         libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *
> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.
> 
> errors.
> 
> After some searching we found that there was no libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.
> 
> I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).
> 
> Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image wors as a workaround for us at the moment.

I made some research in this and there is something i do not understand.

The task-depends.dot generated by bitbake -g (says

  "console-image.do_rootfs" [label="console-image do_rootfs\n0:1.0-r0\n/home/sledz/work/angstrom-setup-scripts/sources/openembedded/recipes/images/console-image.bb"]
  "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "lzo-native.do_populate_sysroot"
  "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "bluez4.do_populate_sysroot"
  ...

So do_rootfs depends only on do_populate_sysroot stages. But the do_rootfs stage itself uses opkg to install the packages into the image.

In my understanding this means that all the ipk files need to be available. But this is not guaranteed by the reported dependencies.

A misunderstanding of mine? Or a bug?

Steffen

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steffen Sledz]

Am 05.08.2011 09:13, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
> On 04.08.2011 08:29, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>> In the last days we switched our local development from an older oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying problem.
>>
>> The test builds on various developer machines were successful but the build on our continuous integration server (with exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of
>>
>> |  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following dependencies for lighttpd:
>> |  *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *         libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *
>> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.
>>
>> errors.
>>
>> After some searching we found that there was no libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.
>>
>> I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).
>>
>> Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>> PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image wors as a workaround for us at the moment.
> 
> I made some research in this and there is something i do not understand.
> 
> The task-depends.dot generated by bitbake -g (says
> 
>   "console-image.do_rootfs" [label="console-image do_rootfs\n0:1.0-r0\n/home/sledz/work/angstrom-setup-scripts/sources/openembedded/recipes/images/console-image.bb"]
>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "lzo-native.do_populate_sysroot"
>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "bluez4.do_populate_sysroot"
>   ...
> 
> So do_rootfs depends only on do_populate_sysroot stages. But the do_rootfs stage itself uses opkg to install the packages into the image.
> 
> In my understanding this means that all the ipk files need to be available. But this is not guaranteed by the reported dependencies.
> 
> A misunderstanding of mine? Or a bug?

Ping!

Did everyone read my message?

If it really is a misunderstanding of mine, please let me know. But if i'm right this seems to be a critical problem.

Steffen

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Tom Rini]

On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Steffen Sledz <sledz@dresearch-fe.de> wrote:
> Am 05.08.2011 09:13, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
>> On 04.08.2011 08:29, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>> In the last days we switched our local development from an older oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying problem.
>>>
>>> The test builds on various developer machines were successful but the build on our continuous integration server (with exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of
>>>
>>> |  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following dependencies for lighttpd:
>>> |  *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *         libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *
>>> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.
>>>
>>> errors.
>>>
>>> After some searching we found that there was no libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).
>>>
>>> Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.
>>>
>>> Any ideas?
>>>
>>> PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image wors as a workaround for us at the moment.
>>
>> I made some research in this and there is something i do not understand.
>>
>> The task-depends.dot generated by bitbake -g (says
>>
>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" [label="console-image do_rootfs\n0:1.0-r0\n/home/sledz/work/angstrom-setup-scripts/sources/openembedded/recipes/images/console-image.bb"]
>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "lzo-native.do_populate_sysroot"
>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "bluez4.do_populate_sysroot"
>>   ...
>>
>> So do_rootfs depends only on do_populate_sysroot stages. But the do_rootfs stage itself uses opkg to install the packages into the image.
>>
>> In my understanding this means that all the ipk files need to be available. But this is not guaranteed by the reported dependencies.
>>
>> A misunderstanding of mine? Or a bug?
>
> Ping!
>
> Did everyone read my message?
>
> If it really is a misunderstanding of mine, please let me know. But if i'm right this seems to be a critical problem.

It sounds both strange and a correct reading of the task lists, iirc.
Did we fix this in oe.dev perhaps and just need to pull a change over?

-- 
Tom

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steffen Sledz]

On 07.08.2011 22:46, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Steffen Sledz <sledz@dresearch-fe.de> wrote:
>> Am 05.08.2011 09:13, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
>>> On 04.08.2011 08:29, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>> In the last days we switched our local development from an older oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying problem.
>>>>
>>>> The test builds on various developer machines were successful but the build on our continuous integration server (with exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of
>>>>
>>>> |  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following dependencies for lighttpd:
>>>> |  *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *         libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *
>>>> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.
>>>>
>>>> errors.
>>>>
>>>> After some searching we found that there was no libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).
>>>>
>>>> Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>
>>>> PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image wors as a workaround for us at the moment.
>>>
>>> I made some research in this and there is something i do not understand.
>>>
>>> The task-depends.dot generated by bitbake -g (says
>>>
>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" [label="console-image do_rootfs\n0:1.0-r0\n/home/sledz/work/angstrom-setup-scripts/sources/openembedded/recipes/images/console-image.bb"]
>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "lzo-native.do_populate_sysroot"
>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "bluez4.do_populate_sysroot"
>>>   ...
>>>
>>> So do_rootfs depends only on do_populate_sysroot stages. But the do_rootfs stage itself uses opkg to install the packages into the image.
>>>
>>> In my understanding this means that all the ipk files need to be available. But this is not guaranteed by the reported dependencies.
>>>
>>> A misunderstanding of mine? Or a bug?
>>
>> Ping!
>>
>> Did everyone read my message?
>>
>> If it really is a misunderstanding of mine, please let me know. But if i'm right this seems to be a critical problem.
> 
> It sounds both strange and a correct reading of the task lists, iirc.
> Did we fix this in oe.dev perhaps and just need to pull a change over?

The mentioned dependency problem was a misinterpretation of the task-depends.dot.

Aside from the do_populate_sysroot there are the following additional dependencies:

 "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "console-image.do_package_update_index_ipk"
 ...
 "console-image.do_package_update_index_ipk" -> "gcc-cross.do_package_write_ipk"
 ...
 "gcc-cross.do_package_write_ipk" -> "gcc-cross.do_package"

The problem seems to be located more likely somewhere inside the gcc-4.3.3-r24.1/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2 recipes. There seems to be a confusion between those which leads to undetermined results.

E.g. the content of tmp.6/work/armv5te-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2/temp/log.do_package_write_ipk.22477 is:
------------------------>snip<------------------------
Packaged contents of libstdc++-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libstdc++-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of libgcc-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgcc-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
------------------------>snip<------------------------

The do_package_write_ipk generates ipk-file with *r24.1.6* (which is the PR of gcc) and not *r24.2.6* (which is the PR of gcc).

BTW: Which of the two recipes (gcc/gcc-cross) should provide the libgcc ipk (in my case none of it did)?

Steffen

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steffen Sledz]

On 09.08.2011 11:23, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> The do_package_write_ipk generates ipk-file with *r24.1.6* (which is the PR of gcc) and not *r24.2.6* (which is the PR of gcc).

Sorry, little typo. Should be:

The do_package_write_ipk generates ipk-file with *r24.1.6* (which is the PR of gcc) and not *r24.2.6* (which is the PR of gcc-cross).

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steffen Sledz]

On 09.08.2011 11:23, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> On 07.08.2011 22:46, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Steffen Sledz <sledz@dresearch-fe.de> wrote:
>>> Am 05.08.2011 09:13, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
>>>> On 04.08.2011 08:29, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>>> In the last days we switched our local development from an older oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> The test builds on various developer machines were successful but the build on our continuous integration server (with exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of
>>>>>
>>>>> |  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following dependencies for lighttpd:
>>>>> |  *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *         libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *
>>>>> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.
>>>>>
>>>>> errors.
>>>>>
>>>>> After some searching we found that there was no libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>
>>>>> PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image wors as a workaround for us at the moment.
>>>>
>>>> I made some research in this and there is something i do not understand.
>>>>
>>>> The task-depends.dot generated by bitbake -g (says
>>>>
>>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" [label="console-image do_rootfs\n0:1.0-r0\n/home/sledz/work/angstrom-setup-scripts/sources/openembedded/recipes/images/console-image.bb"]
>>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "lzo-native.do_populate_sysroot"
>>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "bluez4.do_populate_sysroot"
>>>>   ...
>>>>
>>>> So do_rootfs depends only on do_populate_sysroot stages. But the do_rootfs stage itself uses opkg to install the packages into the image.
>>>>
>>>> In my understanding this means that all the ipk files need to be available. But this is not guaranteed by the reported dependencies.
>>>>
>>>> A misunderstanding of mine? Or a bug?
>>>
>>> Ping!
>>>
>>> Did everyone read my message?
>>>
>>> If it really is a misunderstanding of mine, please let me know. But if i'm right this seems to be a critical problem.
>>
>> It sounds both strange and a correct reading of the task lists, iirc.
>> Did we fix this in oe.dev perhaps and just need to pull a change over?
> 
> The mentioned dependency problem was a misinterpretation of the task-depends.dot.
> 
> Aside from the do_populate_sysroot there are the following additional dependencies:
> 
>  "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "console-image.do_package_update_index_ipk"
>  ...
>  "console-image.do_package_update_index_ipk" -> "gcc-cross.do_package_write_ipk"
>  ...
>  "gcc-cross.do_package_write_ipk" -> "gcc-cross.do_package"
> 
> The problem seems to be located more likely somewhere inside the gcc-4.3.3-r24.1/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2 recipes. There seems to be a confusion between those which leads to undetermined results.
> 
> E.g. the content of tmp.6/work/armv5te-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2/temp/log.do_package_write_ipk.22477 is:
> ------------------------>snip<------------------------
> Packaged contents of libstdc++-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libstdc++-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of libgcc-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgcc-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> ------------------------>snip<------------------------
> 
> The do_package_write_ipk generates ipk-file with *r24.1.6* (which is the PR of gcc) and not *r24.2.6* (which is the PR of gcc).
> 
> BTW: Which of the two recipes (gcc/gcc-cross) should provide the libgcc ipk (in my case none of it did)?

After some bb recipe updates there is a new error of this type.

|  * check_data_file_clashes: Package libgcc-s-dev wants to install file /CACHE/hudson/jobs/HydraIP_Linux_release_image/workspace/OE/tmp.6/rootfs/hydraip-hipox-devimage/usr/lib/libgcc_s.so
| 	But that file is already provided by package  * libgcc-dev
|  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package libsqlite3-dev.

:(

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Khem Raj]

On Thursday, August 11, 2011 10:27:53 AM Steffen Sledz wrote:
> On 09.08.2011 11:23, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> > On 07.08.2011 22:46, Tom Rini wrote:
> >> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Steffen Sledz <sledz@dresearch-fe.de> 
wrote:
> >>> Am 05.08.2011 09:13, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
> >>>> On 04.08.2011 08:29, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> >>>>> In the last days we switched our local development from an older
> >>>>> oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying
> >>>>> problem.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> The test builds on various developer machines were successful
> >>>>> but the build on our continuous integration server (with
> >>>>> exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of>>>>> 
> >>>>> |  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following
> >>>>> |  dependencies for lighttpd: *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *  
> >>>>> |        libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) * *
> >>>>> |  opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> errors.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> After some searching we found that there was no
> >>>>> libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it
> >>>>> should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is
> >>>>> r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for
> >>>>> the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of
> >>>>> gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Any ideas?
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image
> >>>>> wors as a workaround for us at the moment.>>>> 
> >>>> I made some research in this and there is something i do not
> >>>> understand.
> >>>> 
> >>>> The task-depends.dot generated by bitbake -g (says
> >>>> 
> >>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" [label="console-image
> >>>>   do_rootfs\n0:1.0-r0\n/home/sledz/work/angstrom-setup-scripts/
> >>>>   sources/openembedded/recipes/images/console-image.bb"]
> >>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "lzo-native.do_populate_sysroot"
> >>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "bluez4.do_populate_sysroot"
> >>>>   ...
> >>>> 
> >>>> So do_rootfs depends only on do_populate_sysroot stages. But the
> >>>> do_rootfs stage itself uses opkg to install the packages into the
> >>>> image.
> >>>> 
> >>>> In my understanding this means that all the ipk files need to be
> >>>> available. But this is not guaranteed by the reported
> >>>> dependencies.
> >>>> 
> >>>> A misunderstanding of mine? Or a bug?
> >>> 
> >>> Ping!
> >>> 
> >>> Did everyone read my message?
> >>> 
> >>> If it really is a misunderstanding of mine, please let me know. But
> >>> if i'm right this seems to be a critical problem.>> 
> >> It sounds both strange and a correct reading of the task lists, iirc.
> >> Did we fix this in oe.dev perhaps and just need to pull a change over?
> > 
> > The mentioned dependency problem was a misinterpretation of the
> > task-depends.dot.> 
> > Aside from the do_populate_sysroot there are the following additional 
dependencies:
> >  "console-image.do_rootfs" ->
> >  "console-image.do_package_update_index_ipk"
> >  ...
> >  "console-image.do_package_update_index_ipk" ->
> >  "gcc-cross.do_package_write_ipk" ...
> >  "gcc-cross.do_package_write_ipk" -> "gcc-cross.do_package"
> > 
> > The problem seems to be located more likely somewhere inside the
> > gcc-4.3.3-r24.1/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2 recipes. There seems to be a
> > confusion between those which leads to undetermined results.
> > 
> > E.g. the content of
> > tmp.6/work/armv5te-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2/temp/lo
> > g.do_package_write_ipk.22477 is:
> > ------------------------>snip<------------------------
> > Packaged contents of libstdc++-dev into
> > /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libstdc++-de
> > v_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk Packaged contents of libgcc-dev into
> > /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgcc-dev_4
> > .3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> > ------------------------>snip<------------------------
> > 
> > The do_package_write_ipk generates ipk-file with *r24.1.6* (which is the
> > PR of gcc) and not *r24.2.6* (which is the PR of gcc).
> > 
> > BTW: Which of the two recipes (gcc/gcc-cross) should provide the libgcc
> > ipk (in my case none of it did)?


It should be probided by both. We provide it in gcc-cross so that people dont
have to build target gcc just for libgcc.

> After some bb recipe updates there is a new error of this type.
> 
> |  * check_data_file_clashes: Package libgcc-s-dev wants to install file
> |  /CACHE/hudson/jobs/HydraIP_Linux_release_image/workspace/OE/tmp.6/roo
> |  tfs/hydraip-hipox-devimage/usr/lib/libgcc_s.so|  
> | 	But that file is already provided by package  * libgcc-dev
> | 	
> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package libsqlite3-dev.
> :

what changes did you do ?
libgcc dependencies get encoded into ipks
so you might have to regenerate all ipks for best results.

I dont know yet what the problem you are seeing could be. I do not see it here
locally

> :(

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steffen Sledz]

On 11.08.2011 16:30, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Thursday, August 11, 2011 10:27:53 AM Steffen Sledz wrote:
>> On 09.08.2011 11:23, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>> On 07.08.2011 22:46, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Steffen Sledz <sledz@dresearch-fe.de> 
> wrote:
>>>>> Am 05.08.2011 09:13, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
>>>>>> On 04.08.2011 08:29, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>>>>> In the last days we switched our local development from an older
>>>>>>> oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying
>>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The test builds on various developer machines were successful
>>>>>>> but the build on our continuous integration server (with
>>>>>>> exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of>>>>> 
>>>>>>> |  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following
>>>>>>> |  dependencies for lighttpd: *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *  
>>>>>>> |        libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) * *
>>>>>>> |  opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> errors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After some searching we found that there was no
>>>>>>> libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it
>>>>>>> should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is
>>>>>>> r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for
>>>>>>> the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of
>>>>>>> gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image
>>>>>>> wors as a workaround for us at the moment.>>>> 
>>>>>> I made some research in this and there is something i do not
>>>>>> understand.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The task-depends.dot generated by bitbake -g (says
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" [label="console-image
>>>>>>   do_rootfs\n0:1.0-r0\n/home/sledz/work/angstrom-setup-scripts/
>>>>>>   sources/openembedded/recipes/images/console-image.bb"]
>>>>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "lzo-native.do_populate_sysroot"
>>>>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "bluez4.do_populate_sysroot"
>>>>>>   ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So do_rootfs depends only on do_populate_sysroot stages. But the
>>>>>> do_rootfs stage itself uses opkg to install the packages into the
>>>>>> image.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In my understanding this means that all the ipk files need to be
>>>>>> available. But this is not guaranteed by the reported
>>>>>> dependencies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A misunderstanding of mine? Or a bug?
>>>>>
>>>>> Ping!
>>>>>
>>>>> Did everyone read my message?
>>>>>
>>>>> If it really is a misunderstanding of mine, please let me know. But
>>>>> if i'm right this seems to be a critical problem.>> 
>>>> It sounds both strange and a correct reading of the task lists, iirc.
>>>> Did we fix this in oe.dev perhaps and just need to pull a change over?
>>>
>>> The mentioned dependency problem was a misinterpretation of the
>>> task-depends.dot.> 
>>> Aside from the do_populate_sysroot there are the following additional 
> dependencies:
>>>  "console-image.do_rootfs" ->
>>>  "console-image.do_package_update_index_ipk"
>>>  ...
>>>  "console-image.do_package_update_index_ipk" ->
>>>  "gcc-cross.do_package_write_ipk" ...
>>>  "gcc-cross.do_package_write_ipk" -> "gcc-cross.do_package"
>>>
>>> The problem seems to be located more likely somewhere inside the
>>> gcc-4.3.3-r24.1/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2 recipes. There seems to be a
>>> confusion between those which leads to undetermined results.
>>>
>>> E.g. the content of
>>> tmp.6/work/armv5te-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2/temp/lo
>>> g.do_package_write_ipk.22477 is:
>>> ------------------------>snip<------------------------
>>> Packaged contents of libstdc++-dev into
>>> /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libstdc++-de
>>> v_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk Packaged contents of libgcc-dev into
>>> /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgcc-dev_4
>>> .3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
>>> ------------------------>snip<------------------------
>>>
>>> The do_package_write_ipk generates ipk-file with *r24.1.6* (which is the
>>> PR of gcc) and not *r24.2.6* (which is the PR of gcc).
>>>
>>> BTW: Which of the two recipes (gcc/gcc-cross) should provide the libgcc
>>> ipk (in my case none of it did)?
> 
> 
> It should be probided by both. We provide it in gcc-cross so that people dont
> have to build target gcc just for libgcc.

But it isn't provided. :(

Here are related log files of both from a clean build (HEAD of 2011.03-maintenance branch, no modification to the gcc recipes):

----------------------->snip<----------------------
> cat tmp.6/work/armv5te-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/gcc-4.3.3-r24.1/temp/log.do_package_write_ipk.4930
Packaged contents of gcc into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gcc_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of gcc-symlinks into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gcc-symlinks_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of g++ into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/g++_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of g++-symlinks into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/g++-symlinks_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of cpp into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/cpp_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of cpp-symlinks into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/cpp-symlinks_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of g77-symlinks into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/g77-symlinks_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of gfortran into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gfortran_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of gfortran-symlinks into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gfortran-symlinks_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of gcov into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gcov_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of libgcc-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgcc-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of libstdc++-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libstdc++-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of libgfortran-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgfortran-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of gcc-doc into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gcc-doc_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk

> cat tmp.6/work/armv5te-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2/temp/log.do_package_write_ipk.22477
Packaged contents of libstdc++-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libstdc++-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
Packaged contents of libgcc-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgcc-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
----------------------->snip<----------------------

I've frozen this build and can provide additional info if you need more.

>> After some bb recipe updates there is a new error of this type.
>>
>> |  * check_data_file_clashes: Package libgcc-s-dev wants to install file
>> |  /CACHE/hudson/jobs/HydraIP_Linux_release_image/workspace/OE/tmp.6/roo
>> |  tfs/hydraip-hipox-devimage/usr/lib/libgcc_s.so|  
>> | 	But that file is already provided by package  * libgcc-dev
>> | 	
>> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package libsqlite3-dev.
>> :
> 
> what changes did you do ?

Only updated the version of sqlite3 by removing DP="-1" from the sqlite3_3.7.5.bb recipe.

> libgcc dependencies get encoded into ipks
> so you might have to regenerate all ipks for best results.
> 
> I dont know yet what the problem you are seeing could be. I do not see it here
> locally

Just a guess. Could it be a problem with tasks running in parallel.

Regards,
Steffen

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steve Sakoman]

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Steffen Sledz <sledz@dresearch-fe.de> wrote:

> After some bb recipe updates there is a new error of this type.
>
> |  * check_data_file_clashes: Package libgcc-s-dev wants to install file /CACHE/hudson/jobs/HydraIP_Linux_release_image/workspace/OE/tmp.6/rootfs/hydraip-hipox-devimage/usr/lib/libgcc_s.so
> |       But that file is already provided by package  * libgcc-dev
> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package libsqlite3-dev.

Others are also running into this issue!  I've seen messages from
Philip Balister regarding this same problem with his Ettus images:

http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.hardware.usrp.e100/1245

I see it with the GNOME images I build:

|  * check_data_file_clashes: Package libgcc-dev wants to install file
/media/data/gnome-r13-tmp/rootfs/sakoman-gnome-image/usr/lib/libgcc_s.so
| 	But that file is already provided by package  * libgcc-s-dev

In looking through the packages in my deploy directory I see a split
between packages that depend on libgcc-dev and libgcc-s-dev.

Any ideas on how to fix this issue?

Steve

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steve Sakoman]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Steve Sakoman <sakoman@gmail.com> wrote:

> In looking through the packages in my deploy directory I see a split
> between packages that depend on libgcc-dev and libgcc-s-dev.

A typo above -- it is a "recommends" for libgcc-dev and libgcc-s-dev
in the packages, not a "depends".

> Any ideas on how to fix this issue?
>
> Steve
>

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steffen Sledz]

On 12.08.2011 07:56, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> On 11.08.2011 16:30, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Thursday, August 11, 2011 10:27:53 AM Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>> On 09.08.2011 11:23, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>> On 07.08.2011 22:46, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Steffen Sledz <sledz@dresearch-fe.de> 
>> wrote:
>>>>>> Am 05.08.2011 09:13, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
>>>>>>> On 04.08.2011 08:29, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>>>>>> In the last days we switched our local development from an older
>>>>>>>> oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying
>>>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The test builds on various developer machines were successful
>>>>>>>> but the build on our continuous integration server (with
>>>>>>>> exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> |  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following
>>>>>>>> |  dependencies for lighttpd: *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *  
>>>>>>>> |        libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) * *
>>>>>>>> |  opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> errors.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> After some searching we found that there was no
>>>>>>>> libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it
>>>>>>>> should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is
>>>>>>>> r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for
>>>>>>>> the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of
>>>>>>>> gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image
>>>>>>>> wors as a workaround for us at the moment.>>>> 
>>>>>>> I made some research in this and there is something i do not
>>>>>>> understand.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The task-depends.dot generated by bitbake -g (says
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" [label="console-image
>>>>>>>   do_rootfs\n0:1.0-r0\n/home/sledz/work/angstrom-setup-scripts/
>>>>>>>   sources/openembedded/recipes/images/console-image.bb"]
>>>>>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "lzo-native.do_populate_sysroot"
>>>>>>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "bluez4.do_populate_sysroot"
>>>>>>>   ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So do_rootfs depends only on do_populate_sysroot stages. But the
>>>>>>> do_rootfs stage itself uses opkg to install the packages into the
>>>>>>> image.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In my understanding this means that all the ipk files need to be
>>>>>>> available. But this is not guaranteed by the reported
>>>>>>> dependencies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A misunderstanding of mine? Or a bug?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ping!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did everyone read my message?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it really is a misunderstanding of mine, please let me know. But
>>>>>> if i'm right this seems to be a critical problem.>> 
>>>>> It sounds both strange and a correct reading of the task lists, iirc.
>>>>> Did we fix this in oe.dev perhaps and just need to pull a change over?
>>>>
>>>> The mentioned dependency problem was a misinterpretation of the
>>>> task-depends.dot.> 
>>>> Aside from the do_populate_sysroot there are the following additional 
>> dependencies:
>>>>  "console-image.do_rootfs" ->
>>>>  "console-image.do_package_update_index_ipk"
>>>>  ...
>>>>  "console-image.do_package_update_index_ipk" ->
>>>>  "gcc-cross.do_package_write_ipk" ...
>>>>  "gcc-cross.do_package_write_ipk" -> "gcc-cross.do_package"
>>>>
>>>> The problem seems to be located more likely somewhere inside the
>>>> gcc-4.3.3-r24.1/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2 recipes. There seems to be a
>>>> confusion between those which leads to undetermined results.
>>>>
>>>> E.g. the content of
>>>> tmp.6/work/armv5te-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2/temp/lo
>>>> g.do_package_write_ipk.22477 is:
>>>> ------------------------>snip<------------------------
>>>> Packaged contents of libstdc++-dev into
>>>> /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libstdc++-de
>>>> v_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk Packaged contents of libgcc-dev into
>>>> /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgcc-dev_4
>>>> .3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
>>>> ------------------------>snip<------------------------
>>>>
>>>> The do_package_write_ipk generates ipk-file with *r24.1.6* (which is the
>>>> PR of gcc) and not *r24.2.6* (which is the PR of gcc).
>>>>
>>>> BTW: Which of the two recipes (gcc/gcc-cross) should provide the libgcc
>>>> ipk (in my case none of it did)?
>>
>>
>> It should be probided by both. We provide it in gcc-cross so that people dont
>> have to build target gcc just for libgcc.
> 
> But it isn't provided. :(
> 
> Here are related log files of both from a clean build (HEAD of 2011.03-maintenance branch, no modification to the gcc recipes):
> 
> ----------------------->snip<----------------------
>> cat tmp.6/work/armv5te-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/gcc-4.3.3-r24.1/temp/log.do_package_write_ipk.4930
> Packaged contents of gcc into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gcc_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of gcc-symlinks into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gcc-symlinks_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of g++ into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/g++_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of g++-symlinks into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/g++-symlinks_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of cpp into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/cpp_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of cpp-symlinks into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/cpp-symlinks_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of g77-symlinks into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/g77-symlinks_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of gfortran into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gfortran_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of gfortran-symlinks into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gfortran-symlinks_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of gcov into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gcov_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of libgcc-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgcc-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of libstdc++-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libstdc++-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of libgfortran-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgfortran-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of gcc-doc into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/gcc-doc_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> 
>> cat tmp.6/work/armv5te-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/gcc-cross-4.3.3-r24.2/temp/log.do_package_write_ipk.22477
> Packaged contents of libstdc++-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libstdc++-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> Packaged contents of libgcc-dev into /home/sledz/work/HydraIP/OE/tmp.6/deploy/glibc/ipk/armv5te/libgcc-dev_4.3.3-r24.1.6_armv5te.ipk
> ----------------------->snip<----------------------
> 
> I've frozen this build and can provide additional info if you need more.

I can give an all clear at least for this problem.

We found that it only occurred in conjunction with using libunwind (which we used to have a working backtrace). After eliminating it none of the mentioned problems was seens again.

>>> After some bb recipe updates there is a new error of this type.
>>>
>>> |  * check_data_file_clashes: Package libgcc-s-dev wants to install file
>>> |  /CACHE/hudson/jobs/HydraIP_Linux_release_image/workspace/OE/tmp.6/roo
>>> |  tfs/hydraip-hipox-devimage/usr/lib/libgcc_s.so|  
>>> | 	But that file is already provided by package  * libgcc-dev
>>> | 	
>>> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package libsqlite3-dev.
>>> :

This problems seems to be different (see Steve Sakomans mails).

>> what changes did you do ?
> 
> Only updated the version of sqlite3 by removing DP="-1" from the sqlite3_3.7.5.bb recipe.
> 
>> libgcc dependencies get encoded into ipks
>> so you might have to regenerate all ipks for best results.
>>
>> I dont know yet what the problem you are seeing could be. I do not see it here
>> locally
> 
> Just a guess. Could it be a problem with tasks running in parallel.

Regards,
Steffen

PS: I'm i bit disappointed in the weak help from the maintainers in solving the problem. :( But i do not bear grudges[1]. ;-)

[1] Hope that's correct english.

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Khem Raj]

On 8/19/2011 2:11 AM, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> Regards,
> Steffen
>
> PS: I'm i bit disappointed in the weak help from the maintainers in solving the problem. :( But i do not bear grudges[1]. ;-)
>
> [1] Hope that's correct english.

personally I would have liked to help more but was short on time and 
since I could not reproduce the problem at my end. It was not obvious to 
me what the problem was.

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steffen Sledz]

On 19.08.2011 16:21, Khem Raj wrote:
> On 8/19/2011 2:11 AM, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>> Regards,
>> Steffen
>>
>> PS: I'm i bit disappointed in the weak help from the maintainers in solving the problem. :( But i do not bear grudges[1]. ;-)
>>
>> [1] Hope that's correct english.
> 
> personally I would have liked to help more but was short on time and since I could not reproduce the problem at my end. It was not obvious to me what the problem was.

Never mind. It's OK.

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steve Sakoman]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 7:21 AM, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/19/2011 2:11 AM, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>
>> Regards,
>> Steffen
>>
>> PS: I'm i bit disappointed in the weak help from the maintainers in
>> solving the problem. :( But i do not bear grudges[1]. ;-)
>>
>> [1] Hope that's correct english.
>
> personally I would have liked to help more but was short on time and since I
> could not reproduce the problem at my end. It was not obvious to me what the
> problem was.

Khem,

Is there an easy way to tell OE to ignore a recommends for either
libgcc-dev or libgcc-s-dev?  The issue seems to be (at least on my
machine) that packages more or less randomly recommend one or the
other.  Then the image build fails because the two packages supply the
same file.

Steve

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Khem Raj]

On 8/19/2011 7:38 AM, Steve Sakoman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 7:21 AM, Khem Raj<raj.khem@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 8/19/2011 2:11 AM, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Steffen
>>>
>>> PS: I'm i bit disappointed in the weak help from the maintainers in
>>> solving the problem. :( But i do not bear grudges[1]. ;-)
>>>
>>> [1] Hope that's correct english.
>>
>> personally I would have liked to help more but was short on time and since I
>> could not reproduce the problem at my end. It was not obvious to me what the
>> problem was.
>
> Khem,
>
> Is there an easy way to tell OE to ignore a recommends for either
> libgcc-dev or libgcc-s-dev?  The issue seems to be (at least on my
> machine) that packages more or less randomly recommend one or the
> other.  Then the image build fails because the two packages supply the
> same file.

I dont think there is a way out. I think one of those 2 packages should 
be stopped from building

>
> Steve
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steve Sakoman]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Is there an easy way to tell OE to ignore a recommends for either
>> libgcc-dev or libgcc-s-dev?  The issue seems to be (at least on my
>> machine) that packages more or less randomly recommend one or the
>> other.  Then the image build fails because the two packages supply the
>> same file.
>
> I dont think there is a way out. I think one of those 2 packages should be
> stopped from building

Which do you think should be disabled?

Steve

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Khem Raj]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Steve Sakoman <sakoman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Which do you think should be disabled?
>
>

libgcc-dev

Re: [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Steve Sakoman]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Steve Sakoman <sakoman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Which do you think should be disabled?
>
> libgcc-dev

Thanks!  I'll do a test clean build with the generation of this
package disabled.

Steve