**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Mon Dec 23 03:00:01 2019 **** BEGIN LOGGING AT Mon Dec 23 08:31:31 2019 Dec 23 09:09:14 Hi, I'm facing a build issue with my OE env building https://git.osmocom.org/meta-telephony/tree/recipes-isdn/dahdi-linux/dahdi-linux_2.10.2.bb Dec 23 09:10:14 basically in there PATH used during do_package_ipk for package dahdi-firmware doesn't include the machine-specific directory where opkg-build is located (recipe-sysroot-native/) Dec 23 09:10:44 if I comment the line 'PACKAGE_ARCH_dahdi-firmware = "all"' it builds fine, but then I guess the package becomes arch specific Dec 23 09:11:16 is the current way the correct way to do it? (meaning it's a bug in poky pyro), or is there a better way to do it? Dec 23 09:13:29 sorry wrong recipe link: https://git.osmocom.org/meta-telephony/tree/recipes-isdn/dahdi-linux/dahdi-linux_2.10.2.bb?h=201705 Dec 23 09:19:27 pespin: if, then its a bug in the recipe not bundling firmware arch independently Dec 23 09:20:05 pespin: not unheard of, that is. i'd suggest to get in touch with the maintainers for the reasoning behind it. Dec 23 09:20:21 having said that, pyro is pretty outdated, BTW Dec 23 09:21:03 LetoThe2nd, I know it's outdated, there are some plans to move to newer one at some point in the future. You mean pyro maintainers? Dec 23 09:21:24 pespin: no, meta-telephony maintainers. Dec 23 09:21:39 LetoThe2nd, well I'm the one mostly maintaining meta-telephony right now :P Dec 23 09:22:20 pespin: then ask yourself :) Dec 23 09:22:40 the problem seems to be that at some point when the recipe was added/updated, an older version of poky was used which probably built fine, but it doesn't now that we enabled it again with pyro Dec 23 09:23:42 pespin: then your best chance is to read the migration guide. on the yocto dcos, there is a pretty detailed rundown of the changes over versions. Dec 23 09:23:53 LetoThe2nd, I didn't understand what you meant with "bundling firmware arch independently". Could you specify a bit more? Dec 23 09:26:02 pespin: things can be arch independent, and i think the PACKAGE_ARCH is already the correct way. sorry, i mistook that the maintainers commented out that line and you reenabled it. Dec 23 09:27:10 LetoThe2nd, no the line was not commented out, the whole recipe was not being built in the regular builds until now. It probably was building long time ago with an older OE version though. Dec 23 09:27:36 pespin: yeah, i think i got that by now. sorry, but no idea then Dec 23 09:28:04 commenting the line makes it build fine, with the line in there build fails Dec 23 09:30:01 only hint i have is to look at the migration guide Dec 23 09:31:06 LetoThe2nd, nothing shows up there looking for PACKAGE_ARCH Dec 23 09:32:23 it might certainly be hidden a bit. other idea, looking at current recipes bringing firmware Dec 23 09:37:09 I think recipes in general don't specify different archs for different packages in the same recipe Dec 23 09:37:37 pespin: yeah. you can always split it, though Dec 23 09:38:05 might be a good idea anyways looking at the mangling of SRC_URI and FIRMWARE_URI into one recipe Dec 23 09:38:31 yes, will look into that, thanks Dec 23 09:43:53 have fun! Dec 23 14:11:57 kergoth: Hmm, Thanks. I'll take a look Dec 23 14:19:07 kergoth: PYREX_OEROOT isn't referenced in the default pyrex.ini anymore, is it in your local one? Dec 23 19:36:13 khem, meta-oe is back to passing yocto-check-layer Dec 23 22:26:19 armpit: yay, I owe you a bottle of gluehwein Dec 23 22:26:42 armpit: does the meta-oe build succeed on AB now ? Dec 23 22:36:20 khem, the yocto-check layer is being done at home. meta-oe for zeus now passes with the patch in zeus-next. Dec 23 22:36:44 the AB does not run check layer on meta-oe. maybe it should?? Dec 23 22:37:15 I think it will help if it did **** ENDING LOGGING AT Tue Dec 24 02:59:57 2019