[OE-core] [PATCH 13/22] sanity: Dont throw a warning if TUNE_PKGARCH is in PACKAGE_ARCHS twice
galak at kernel.crashing.org
Mon Aug 1 20:51:22 CEST 2011
On Aug 1, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> On (01/08/11 09:11), Kumar Gala wrote:
>> On Aug 1, 2011, at 8:03 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 00:36 -0700, Saul Wold wrote:
>>>> Signed-off-by: Saul Wold <sgw at linux.intel.com>
>>>> meta/classes/sanity.bbclass | 8 +++++---
>>>> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>> diff --git a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass
>>>> index 999e15d..dc11c9e 100644
>>>> --- a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass
>>>> +++ b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass
>>>> @@ -383,12 +383,14 @@ def check_sanity(e):
>>>> dups = 
>>>> for pa in pkgarchs.split():
>>>> - if seen.get(pa, 0) == 1:
>>>> + if pa == tunepkg:
>>>> + tunefound = True
>>>> + if seen.get(pa, 0) == 1:
>>>> + pkgarchs.remove(pa)
>>>> + elif seen.get(pa, 0) == 1:
>>>> seen[pa] = 1
>>>> - if pa == tunepkg:
>>>> - tunefound = True
>>>> if len(dups):
>>>> messages = messages + "Error, the PACKAGE_ARCHS variable contains duplicates. The following archs are listed more than once: %s" % " ".join(dups)
>>> How about we don't put duplicates in there in the first place?
>>> Which board/tune files is this occurring with?
>> Yeah, not sure about this one, I added the sanity check to find this early. Ran into issues with my PPC patch set and took a while to find (thus figured a sanity check made sense to check early on).
> I think the issue is when TUNE_PKGARCH does not end up in the
> PACKAGE_ARCHS and then package managers dont pick the ipks/rpms/debs
> which are under that dir in deploy/ipk.
> Usually we have been doing += to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCH
> variable in layers but with latest tune overhaul += does not work
> and we have to do _append/_prepend. I dont know if that is Kumar's
> original problem
Yeah, its why I added the sanity check to make sure TUNE_PKGARCH was in the PACKAGE_ARCHS list.
More information about the Openembedded-core