From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [78.110.170.148] (helo=tinyArch.localdomain) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Sli8z-0007wT-Tl for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 02 Jul 2012 17:02:29 +0200 Received: from [192.168.0.41] (unknown [195.171.99.130]) by tinyArch.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B4BA600CA for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 15:45:23 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4FF1B5B7.4000808@communistcode.co.uk> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 15:52:39 +0100 From: Jack Mitchell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120616 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <4FE9C8B9.5090808@communistcode.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <4FE9C8B9.5090808@communistcode.co.uk> Subject: Re: net-snmp build failure X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 15:02:30 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 26/06/12 15:35, Jack Mitchell wrote: > Has anyone successfully built net-snmp-server for the Beaglebone under > the Poky distribution (or more generally using GCC 4.7.x for arm)? I > had a go today but it failed (see file attached) and it looks to me > like a bug in GCC or a bug in net-snmp that GCC 4.7 has shown up... > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel To fix this build failure I removed the systemd patch which allowed it to build. The issue (initially) seems that the patch enables systemd but there is no configure switch to disable it once the patch is applied. I'm sure this is wrong as it sound ridiculous, however easiest for my to just try to get it going was removal of the patch. I will hopefully have time to revisit later and see if I can put a proper fix in. Regards, -- Jack Mitchell (jack@embed.me.uk) Embedded Systems Engineer http://www.embed.me.uk --