**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Tue Nov 01 02:59:57 2011 Nov 01 07:42:39 morning all Nov 01 07:43:09 morning Nov 01 08:18:55 RP__, JaMa|Off, all: gm Nov 01 08:19:28 RP__: retried building my image after fiddling a little bit with the recipe, now managed to build it without problems Nov 01 08:20:19 anyone an idea on how to build an image without any package management related stuff in the image? I could not find it in the ref manual (or I overlooked it) Nov 01 08:29:46 eFfeM_work: ${@base_contains("IMAGE_FEATURES", "package-management" Nov 01 08:30:02 sso remove package-management from IMAGE_FEATURES Nov 01 08:30:08 JaMa|Off: ah ok, thanks Nov 01 08:32:52 this is not listed in manual E3 where it lists the image features Nov 01 08:33:33 * eFfeM_work is trying Nov 01 08:52:08 got some other issues building the image; decided to try core-image-minimal instead as a starter but that one starts compiling all kind of x11 stuff Nov 01 08:52:09 yuk Nov 01 08:55:48 i just want to create a simple image with no package management, static device nodes, busybox and dropbear .... Nov 01 09:51:58 JaMa|Off: managed to make my own small image, also had to add Nov 01 09:51:59 ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "remove_packaging_data_files ; " Nov 01 09:52:26 to the image recipe (and still it does create some /etc/rc* junk that I do not need, but oh well) Nov 01 15:56:59 RP__: ping Nov 01 16:00:19 sgw: pong Nov 01 16:03:16 RP__: I just sync'ed with master, are the dbus changes in a branch I can test with? Nov 01 16:04:09 sgw: http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=rpurdie/pkgfix but there is other "stuff" in it Nov 01 16:08:38 RP__: as for the xuser issue, I tried to use useradd_sysroot_prepend_${PN}, but it did not get executed "I added echo's to the code and did not see them, also no run.do_install was created. Nov 01 16:16:22 sgw: That isn't really a surprise as its run by the preinst Nov 01 16:16:33 er, prefunc Nov 01 16:17:34 unless i'm missing something, that's not going to do anything anyway. either pn isn't an override, in which case the prepend and ${PN} might be flipped around, or you need pn-${PN}, as ${PN} isn't an override Nov 01 16:17:48 (admittedly havent' looked at the useradd code at all, only the context in this channel) Nov 01 16:18:24 kergoth_: I will try that nw Nov 01 16:19:09 * fray wishes we had found these problems before.. but I'm happy the useradd code is being used and bugs found Nov 01 16:20:45 fray: this is a special edge case with reading from a file for creating the xuser conditionally, so not surprising, not really bugs in useradd directly. Nov 01 16:26:06 ahh Nov 01 16:51:13 sgw: I'm still thinking we might just have to hardcode that and always create the user... Nov 01 16:55:35 RP__: Hmm, that would be too bad, I am still testing your changes, then I will be back to my changes, so far your changes are working for ipk Nov 01 16:56:30 sgw: When you've confirmed they're working I'll likely push them Nov 01 17:00:46 RP__: build failure in eglibc packaging, http://pastebin.com/CNykmpPT Nov 01 17:01:28 sgw: not my patch. Looks like a race between debian packaging and rpm Nov 01 17:01:40 RP__: looks like it's finding or not find deb stuff, right a race Nov 01 17:01:50 I have all 3 packaging going Nov 01 17:02:08 RP__: but does it show up now? Nov 01 17:02:43 sgw: We had locks to stop that Nov 01 17:03:22 fray: ping Nov 01 17:03:41 herhe Nov 01 17:03:45 'er.. here even Nov 01 17:03:52 BTW I think I have the prelinker working for x32... ;) Nov 01 17:04:06 sgw: bug in what the rpm class is doing I think Nov 01 17:04:27 (I was told this was multiple weeks of effort.. I'm on day two.. total of about 12 hours of work.. much of that was simply reasing and understanding the specs -- and realizing they are the same as stock X86_64 ABI, with a different word size Nov 01 17:04:32 but why is deb putting those control files there? :/ Nov 01 17:05:01 RP__. fray: where does RPM keep permission information? I am looking at the dbus CONTENTS.cpio and it shows root ownership for the files that need to be messagebus owned. Nov 01 17:05:33 cpio is based on raw disk.. Nov 01 17:05:34 sgw: Looking in mc, the files looked correct to me Nov 01 17:05:41 you need to query the RPM for the actual permissions info Nov 01 17:05:50 let me find the right string Nov 01 17:05:51 * RP__ hugs mc Nov 01 17:06:01 RP__: for ipk and deb yes, but not CONTENTS.cpio under mc for me anyways Nov 01 17:06:26 morning davest! Nov 01 17:07:35 sgw -- rpm -qp --queryformat "[%{FILENAMES} %{FILEMODES} %{FILEUSERNAME}:%{FILEGROUPNAME}\n]" Nov 01 17:07:50 the mode is in decimal by default so you'll have to convert.. I'm trying to remember the magic to dump it in oct Nov 01 17:08:34 replace %{FILEMODES} with: %7.7{FILEMODES:octal} Nov 01 17:08:43 (print 7 characters, do it in octal) Nov 01 17:09:09 Howdy all! Nov 01 17:09:23 sgw: What puzzles me is that path eglibc-2.13-r17+svnr14157/package/DEBIAN. It should only ever do this in packages-split :/ Nov 01 17:09:24 for the pastebin you did.. Nov 01 17:09:30 davest: hi! Nov 01 17:09:41 hi davest Nov 01 17:09:44 RPM walks the packages-split and simply remembers the list of files available.. if debian has written something in there.,. those files will be walked as well.. Nov 01 17:09:46 causing that error.. Nov 01 17:10:07 sounds like we need to serialize the package generation if any files are being placed within the package or package-split directory Nov 01 17:10:16 fray: this is written in packages, not packages-split :/ Nov 01 17:10:17 RP__, fray Ok thanks, rpm reports the correct permission. Nov 01 17:10:29 fray: There are already locks Nov 01 17:10:38 fray: but I'm unsure if rpm is using them sanely Nov 01 17:10:48 the error indicates that the file wasn't found in "package".. "packages-split" is what we walk to get a list of files to install Nov 01 17:10:54 fray: by operating on packages instead of packages-split its probably safe Nov 01 17:10:58 RP__: re-ran the bitbake and eglibc packaged correctly with RPM. Nov 01 17:11:15 fray: ah, right, so it is not locking correctly :/ Nov 01 17:11:38 RPM doesn't care if there are extra files there (I have that disabled).. but it does case if someone is mucking with packages-split Nov 01 17:11:47 fray: Its the lines like lf = bb.utils.lockfile(root + ".lock") in package_rpm.bbclass Nov 01 17:12:00 the premise is that packages == combination of all of the packages-split/* directories Nov 01 17:12:13 if that is NOT true, then we need a lock -- or we need to do the RPM packaging differently Nov 01 17:12:45 we also could decide when walking the split tree to verify the file is in the package directory as well.. that would resolve this Nov 01 17:15:39 fray: does it list all the files in the spec file or just the directory? Nov 01 17:15:55 * RP__ is trying to find a local copy but can't, I seem to have removed all my rpm builds Nov 01 17:15:57 all files and directories.. RPM itself is not permitted to walk anything, we do that in python Nov 01 17:16:11 heh I'm not sure I even have any local RPM builds right now.. Nov 01 17:16:21 fray: This is what is puzzling me - we do the walk holding the right locks Nov 01 17:16:22 but you'll see in the generated .spec files a list of all of the directories and files.. Nov 01 17:16:45 So some extra files might appear outside the locks but they shouldn't get seen by rpm Nov 01 17:17:07 in package_rpm.bbclass look for "walk_files" Nov 01 17:17:15 that is what actually does the work Nov 01 17:17:31 once it has walked everything.. then it moves from using the packages-split to package directory Nov 01 17:17:58 walk_files is called multiple times.. once for each package ebing produced.. Nov 01 17:58:02 I've given in and merged the patches Nov 01 17:58:15 It wasn't working well at all, this works better... Nov 02 02:20:55 hello. i am new to yocto and embedded linux development. can anyone help me? does the bitbake metadata include kernel configuration or do i need make menuconfig for that? Nov 02 02:22:51 adriano87: good evening Nov 02 02:23:17 adriano87: it contains a generic kernel config that is basic full configuration Nov 02 02:24:05 if you want to customize it you would run "bitbake linux-yocto -c menuconfig" and then you can customize it, you should review the documentation on the website for more details. Nov 02 02:25:50 sgw: oh thanks. i am getting slightly lost in the documentation. sorry its quite a read. thanks for the reply. Nov 02 02:26:47 what does the meta/ folder contain and what does the meta-yocto/ folder contain? What is the difference? Nov 02 02:56:46 what does the meta/ folder contain and what does the meta-yocto/ folder contain? What is the difference? **** ENDING LOGGING AT Wed Nov 02 02:59:57 2011