On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 09:06 -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Richard Purdie >> wrote: >> > 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: >> >> Hmmm. I didn't realize this had been picked up yet, I was waiting for >> a repost with the Sign-offs. I assume this is master under test ? I can >> pick up the patch from there and send an updated patch, since Chen Qi >> won't be around to look into this for a few days. > > It was master under test, it won't make master until it works :) > > I don't mind who sends me the working version. Attached is the fixed up patch with DEPENDS, the existing one had a typo in: do_config[depends] = "kern-tools-native:do_populate_sysroot" I've gone ahead and replaced it with a DEPENDS and tested the failure case here. This is a complete patch replacement, let me know if you'd prefer something incremental. Cheers, Bruce > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > -- "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end"