From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f50.google.com (mail-it0-f50.google.com [209.85.214.50]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB6362135; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 22:07:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f50.google.com with SMTP id f6so49716006ith.0; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:08:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=FwO70BOPv9AnpWIs2iUbA8FMFMsnJsj+ni0KrlDmBtU=; b=BkWoQajrtYd55CI84XF8f63xgNylTk3KyeMrYo2fQ7BqCFiQCtFT2iWh+FbxG9cz75 pvIaM7MCdfeHwQUQhwuHympDHFtVEMnwM+iNdwUtI2v7xmW+eKTfO0U00knBZux+ezPK kWgRqde0Z/Z2Mws6evs0Q22m5cM2paTDzDhlouV84y+CvqESnI+QDzrmEI/bKrMEX9Lq YEfCByddkoS51eRV8FoTh4QMSf4xm85H++VrawuGWXA6hgd845ZFi1VY8Yaoj5Mjq0Ye lDHEed0d0lSKRRSlU6OFmKUzIvSdVhYjS6MK4FIkhGaqlwdt6QVT0gKlFJRlVlRlLc7S qGfA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FwO70BOPv9AnpWIs2iUbA8FMFMsnJsj+ni0KrlDmBtU=; b=CAeqCUEgDFDT/vsKk4eHI9BkzfyVh+CrWAzjAD+65xjgvhYDEspxLwiqSfCEmt2t+Q N8vu3gRsWPBsMp4Piy110NSHECYArPfWP+qI1Mldzu/MbAHJNra8mS10oXTurShJq626 4Bi2TkFnzWfpHjmiAkcq8rdA7o1GFR79af1ffk6bzk3YKXpuYYqffX8uDWgqG03+MOnR OQv3s53Uz8FY3DE3NWe6+DigIJb1/CKGzpwEUjK/XQyL2+dvtJL13SlzjvtL4jbj0vaa J2iWAO5L+8HynE/GUdmtF2W2EXplgbMzKwbWTrQoardyN1eQdoY1QKa96GwbW/CXYrrc V78A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLQzw3WDlRNJrrqaFiYKzXZjgcef20XiyUo6eQQsMEK4wQ/TSalwWhu3fBya/KiwIaxPFA/hBUJ4YxcoA== X-Received: by 10.36.43.216 with SMTP id h207mr18132046ita.66.1466633280152; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:08:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: kergoth@gmail.com Received: by 10.79.130.66 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:07:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <754f3c3e-6dfe-766f-eb7c-f0983c945cc7@windriver.com> References: <20160615073901.27831.65435@opal.openembedded.org> <20160622155839.GC4153@jama> <1466631350.3319.200.camel@linuxfoundation.org> <754f3c3e-6dfe-766f-eb7c-f0983c945cc7@windriver.com> From: Christopher Larson Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:07:40 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AIAP8i-iZgJK37ZZQ8P5FzYj9Yo Message-ID: To: Mark Hatle Cc: openembedded-commits@lists.openembedded.org, "bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org" , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: Bitbake output format changed Was: [oe-commits] [bitbake] branch master updated (a3f464d -> 0219271) X-BeenThere: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussion that advance bitbake development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 22:08:01 -0000 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114748a2adf1830535e52be0 --001a114748a2adf1830535e52be0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Mark Hatle wrote: > On 6/22/16 4:35 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-06-22 at 17:58 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 07:39:01AM +0000, git@git.openembedded.org wr > >> ote: > >>> rpurdie pushed a change to branch master > >>> in repository bitbake. > >>> > >>> adds 2c88afb taskdata/runqueue: Rewrite without use of ID > >>> indirection > >> > >> Is it expected that this change also changes the format of summary > >> shown at the end of the build and failed tasks. > >> > >> The commit message doesn't mention this (it even says: > >> .. > >> On the most part there shouldn't be user visible changes. > >> .. > >> There should be no functionality changes in this patch, its purely a > >> data structure change and that is visible in the patch. > >> .. > >> ) > >> > >> So before I start fixing scripts (e.g. test-dependencies) which are > >> trying to parse bitbake output to work with new format, please > >> confirm that this was intentional and that it will stay this way. > >> > >> It's also not clear why the task is mentioned twice, e.g. as: > >> NOTE: Running task 512 of 548 (ID: /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded > >> -core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch, /OE/build/oe > >> -core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch) > >> ERROR: Task /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes > >> -devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch (/OE/build/oe-core/openembedded > >> -core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch) failed with exit > >> code '1' > >> > >> are there cases where these 2 are different? and can both messages > >> use the same "format" for task description? > > > > The taskids are no more, there is simply no notion of them inside > > bitbake any longer. That means that yes, we probably do need to change > > the output a bit since the number doesn't mean anything. > > > > Equally, it shouldn't be showing the same thing twice, that is a bug. > > Internally to bitbake, everthing is now in the form (or will be when > > multiconfig lands) "[multiconfig::] > filename>:". The question is whether we expose that to the > > user or massage it at all. I'm tempted just to expose that string to > > the user. > > I'm certainly and advocate of just exposing that string. I think in the > end > that is easier to explain to someone, then trying to understand a massaged > output. I'd agree with that. Using the filenames is actually a nice convenience when you need to examine a recipe. -- Christopher Larson clarson at kergoth dot com Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus Maintainer - Tslib Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics --001a114748a2adf1830535e52be0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriv= er.com> wrote:
On 6/22/16 4:35 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-06-22 at 17:58 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 07:39:01AM +0000, git@git.openembedded.org wr
>> ote:
>>> rpurdie pushed a change to branch master
>>> in repository bitbake.
>>>
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0adds=C2=A0 2c88afb=C2=A0 =C2=A0taskd= ata/runqueue: Rewrite without use of ID
>>> indirection
>>
>> Is it expected that this change also changes the format of summary=
>> shown at the end of the build and failed tasks.
>>
>> The commit message doesn't mention this (it even says:
>> ..
>> On the most part there shouldn't be user visible changes.
>> ..
>> There should be no functionality changes in this patch, its purely= a
>> data structure change and that is visible in the patch.
>> ..
>> )
>>
>> So before I start fixing scripts (e.g. test-dependencies) which ar= e
>> trying to parse bitbake output to work with new format, please
>> confirm that this was intentional and that it will stay this way.<= br> >>
>> It's also not clear why the task is mentioned twice, e.g. as:<= br> >>=C2=A0 =C2=A0NOTE: Running task 512 of 548 (ID: /OE/build/oe-core/o= penembedded
>> -core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch, /OE/build/oe
>> -core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch= )
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0ERROR: Task /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/r= ecipes
>> -devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch (/OE/build/oe-core/openembedded
>> -core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch) failed with exit=
>> code '1'
>>
>> are there cases where these 2 are different? and can both messages=
>> use the same "format" for task description?
>
> The taskids are no more, there is simply no notion of them inside
> bitbake any longer. That means that yes, we probably do need to change=
> the output a bit since the number doesn't mean anything.
>
> Equally, it shouldn't be showing the same thing twice, that is a b= ug.
> Internally to bitbake, everthing is now in the form (or will be when > multiconfig lands) "[multiconfig:<configname>:]<recipe > filename>:<taskname>". The question is whether we expose= that to the
> user or massage it at all. I'm tempted just to expose that string = to
> the user.

I'm certainly and advocate of just exposing that string.=C2= =A0 I think in the end
that is easier to explain to someone, then trying to understand a massaged = output.

I'd agree with that. Using the = filenames is actually a nice convenience when you need to examine a recipe.=
--
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - Bit= Bake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Eng= ineer, Mentor Graphics
--001a114748a2adf1830535e52be0-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f50.google.com (mail-it0-f50.google.com [209.85.214.50]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB6362135; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 22:07:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f50.google.com with SMTP id f6so49716006ith.0; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:08:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=FwO70BOPv9AnpWIs2iUbA8FMFMsnJsj+ni0KrlDmBtU=; b=BkWoQajrtYd55CI84XF8f63xgNylTk3KyeMrYo2fQ7BqCFiQCtFT2iWh+FbxG9cz75 pvIaM7MCdfeHwQUQhwuHympDHFtVEMnwM+iNdwUtI2v7xmW+eKTfO0U00knBZux+ezPK kWgRqde0Z/Z2Mws6evs0Q22m5cM2paTDzDhlouV84y+CvqESnI+QDzrmEI/bKrMEX9Lq YEfCByddkoS51eRV8FoTh4QMSf4xm85H++VrawuGWXA6hgd845ZFi1VY8Yaoj5Mjq0Ye lDHEed0d0lSKRRSlU6OFmKUzIvSdVhYjS6MK4FIkhGaqlwdt6QVT0gKlFJRlVlRlLc7S qGfA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FwO70BOPv9AnpWIs2iUbA8FMFMsnJsj+ni0KrlDmBtU=; b=CAeqCUEgDFDT/vsKk4eHI9BkzfyVh+CrWAzjAD+65xjgvhYDEspxLwiqSfCEmt2t+Q N8vu3gRsWPBsMp4Piy110NSHECYArPfWP+qI1Mldzu/MbAHJNra8mS10oXTurShJq626 4Bi2TkFnzWfpHjmiAkcq8rdA7o1GFR79af1ffk6bzk3YKXpuYYqffX8uDWgqG03+MOnR OQv3s53Uz8FY3DE3NWe6+DigIJb1/CKGzpwEUjK/XQyL2+dvtJL13SlzjvtL4jbj0vaa J2iWAO5L+8HynE/GUdmtF2W2EXplgbMzKwbWTrQoardyN1eQdoY1QKa96GwbW/CXYrrc V78A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLQzw3WDlRNJrrqaFiYKzXZjgcef20XiyUo6eQQsMEK4wQ/TSalwWhu3fBya/KiwIaxPFA/hBUJ4YxcoA== X-Received: by 10.36.43.216 with SMTP id h207mr18132046ita.66.1466633280152; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:08:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: kergoth@gmail.com Received: by 10.79.130.66 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:07:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <754f3c3e-6dfe-766f-eb7c-f0983c945cc7@windriver.com> References: <20160615073901.27831.65435@opal.openembedded.org> <20160622155839.GC4153@jama> <1466631350.3319.200.camel@linuxfoundation.org> <754f3c3e-6dfe-766f-eb7c-f0983c945cc7@windriver.com> From: Christopher Larson Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:07:40 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AIAP8i-iZgJK37ZZQ8P5FzYj9Yo Message-ID: To: Mark Hatle Cc: openembedded-commits@lists.openembedded.org, "bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org" , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [bitbake-devel] Bitbake output format changed Was: [oe-commits] [bitbake] branch master updated (a3f464d -> 0219271) X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 22:08:01 -0000 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114748a2adf1830535e52be0 --001a114748a2adf1830535e52be0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Mark Hatle wrote: > On 6/22/16 4:35 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-06-22 at 17:58 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 07:39:01AM +0000, git@git.openembedded.org wr > >> ote: > >>> rpurdie pushed a change to branch master > >>> in repository bitbake. > >>> > >>> adds 2c88afb taskdata/runqueue: Rewrite without use of ID > >>> indirection > >> > >> Is it expected that this change also changes the format of summary > >> shown at the end of the build and failed tasks. > >> > >> The commit message doesn't mention this (it even says: > >> .. > >> On the most part there shouldn't be user visible changes. > >> .. > >> There should be no functionality changes in this patch, its purely a > >> data structure change and that is visible in the patch. > >> .. > >> ) > >> > >> So before I start fixing scripts (e.g. test-dependencies) which are > >> trying to parse bitbake output to work with new format, please > >> confirm that this was intentional and that it will stay this way. > >> > >> It's also not clear why the task is mentioned twice, e.g. as: > >> NOTE: Running task 512 of 548 (ID: /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded > >> -core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch, /OE/build/oe > >> -core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch) > >> ERROR: Task /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes > >> -devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch (/OE/build/oe-core/openembedded > >> -core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch) failed with exit > >> code '1' > >> > >> are there cases where these 2 are different? and can both messages > >> use the same "format" for task description? > > > > The taskids are no more, there is simply no notion of them inside > > bitbake any longer. That means that yes, we probably do need to change > > the output a bit since the number doesn't mean anything. > > > > Equally, it shouldn't be showing the same thing twice, that is a bug. > > Internally to bitbake, everthing is now in the form (or will be when > > multiconfig lands) "[multiconfig::] > filename>:". The question is whether we expose that to the > > user or massage it at all. I'm tempted just to expose that string to > > the user. > > I'm certainly and advocate of just exposing that string. I think in the > end > that is easier to explain to someone, then trying to understand a massaged > output. I'd agree with that. Using the filenames is actually a nice convenience when you need to examine a recipe. -- Christopher Larson clarson at kergoth dot com Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus Maintainer - Tslib Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics --001a114748a2adf1830535e52be0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriv= er.com> wrote:
On 6/22/16 4:35 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-06-22 at 17:58 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 07:39:01AM +0000, git@git.openembedded.org wr
>> ote:
>>> rpurdie pushed a change to branch master
>>> in repository bitbake.
>>>
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0adds=C2=A0 2c88afb=C2=A0 =C2=A0taskd= ata/runqueue: Rewrite without use of ID
>>> indirection
>>
>> Is it expected that this change also changes the format of summary=
>> shown at the end of the build and failed tasks.
>>
>> The commit message doesn't mention this (it even says:
>> ..
>> On the most part there shouldn't be user visible changes.
>> ..
>> There should be no functionality changes in this patch, its purely= a
>> data structure change and that is visible in the patch.
>> ..
>> )
>>
>> So before I start fixing scripts (e.g. test-dependencies) which ar= e
>> trying to parse bitbake output to work with new format, please
>> confirm that this was intentional and that it will stay this way.<= br> >>
>> It's also not clear why the task is mentioned twice, e.g. as:<= br> >>=C2=A0 =C2=A0NOTE: Running task 512 of 548 (ID: /OE/build/oe-core/o= penembedded
>> -core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch, /OE/build/oe
>> -core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch= )
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0ERROR: Task /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/r= ecipes
>> -devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch (/OE/build/oe-core/openembedded
>> -core/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/sftp.bb:do_fetch) failed with exit=
>> code '1'
>>
>> are there cases where these 2 are different? and can both messages=
>> use the same "format" for task description?
>
> The taskids are no more, there is simply no notion of them inside
> bitbake any longer. That means that yes, we probably do need to change=
> the output a bit since the number doesn't mean anything.
>
> Equally, it shouldn't be showing the same thing twice, that is a b= ug.
> Internally to bitbake, everthing is now in the form (or will be when > multiconfig lands) "[multiconfig:<configname>:]<recipe > filename>:<taskname>". The question is whether we expose= that to the
> user or massage it at all. I'm tempted just to expose that string = to
> the user.

I'm certainly and advocate of just exposing that string.=C2= =A0 I think in the end
that is easier to explain to someone, then trying to understand a massaged = output.

I'd agree with that. Using the = filenames is actually a nice convenience when you need to examine a recipe.=
--
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - Bit= Bake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Eng= ineer, Mentor Graphics
--001a114748a2adf1830535e52be0--