u-boot: Upgrade to 2017.09
PATCH 1/1 u-boot: Upgrade to 2017.09
This upgrades the U-Boot to the 2017.09 release.
---
.../u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} | 2 +-
.../u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} | 0
.../u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} | 0
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb} | 0
4 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} (89%)
rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} (100%)
rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} (100%)
rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb} (100%)meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc +1 -1
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ PE = "1" # We use the revision in order to avoid having to fetch it from the # repo during parse -SRCREV = "d85ca029f257b53a96da6c2fb421e78a003a9943" +SRCREV = "c98ac3487e413c71e5d36322ef3324b21c6f60f9" SRC_URI = "git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git \ file://MPC8315ERDB-enable-DHCP.patch \
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb +0 -0
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb +0 -0
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.07.bb +0 -0
Signature · 1 line
2.14.1
PATCH 1/1 u-boot: Upgrade to 2017.09
Quoted 3 lines · Otavio Salvador
This upgrades the U-Boot to the 2017.09 release.
Signed-off-by Otavio Salvador <[email protected]>
Wrong ML, but since this is already here ...
Quoted 28 lines
---
.../u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} | 2 +- .../u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} | 0 .../u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} | 0 meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb} | 0 4 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} (89%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb} (100%)meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc +1
-1@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ PE = "1" # We use the revision in order to avoid having to fetch it from the # repo during parse -SRCREV = "d85ca029f257b53a96da6c2fb421e78a003a9943" +SRCREV = "c98ac3487e413c71e5d36322ef3324b21c6f60f9" SRC_URI = "git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git \ file://MPC8315ERDB-enable-DHCP.patch \
...
file://10m50-update-device-tree.patch
What is the status of those dangling patches ? They were apparently posted, but didn't make it into the last two (?) releases.
[...]
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Marek Vasut
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
...
Quoted 2 lines
What is the status of those dangling patches ? They were apparently posted, but didn't make it into the last two (?) releases.
I am confused. Are you asking for U-Boot community or OE community?
Signature · 3 lines
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
PATCH 1/1 u-boot: Upgrade to 2017.09
Quoted 6 lines · Otavio Salvador
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
...Quoted 2 lines
What is the status of those dangling patches ? They were apparently posted, but didn't make it into the last two (?) releases.
I am confused. Are you asking for U-Boot community or OE community?
How does that matter ? I am asking about the status of those patches and why they didn't make it upstream yet. Something should be done about that.
Automated update of the U-Boot recipe version is great and all, but that's not all that should be done when new version is released . The outstanding patches need to be rechecked every now and then too so they get upstream and don't start piling up in OE core.
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Marek,
Quoted 8 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 6 lines · Otavio Salvador
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
...Quoted 2 lines
What is the status of those dangling patches ? They were apparently posted, but didn't make it into the last two (?) releases.
I am confused. Are you asking for U-Boot community or OE community?
Quoted 7 lines
How does that matter ? I am asking about the status of those patches and why they didn't make it upstream yet. Something should be done about that.
Automated update of the U-Boot recipe version is great and all, but that's not all that should be done when new version is released . The outstanding patches need to be rechecked every now and then too so they get upstream and don't start piling up in OE core.
You are the maintainer, so step up and do it. I did the upgrade as I had it here for testing so I thought it would be good to send it.
Signature · 3 lines
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
PATCH 1/1 u-boot: Upgrade to 2017.09
Quoted 14 lines · Otavio Salvador
Marek,
Quoted 11 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 6 lines · Otavio Salvador
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
...Quoted 2 lines
What is the status of those dangling patches ? They were apparently posted, but didn't make it into the last two (?) releases.
I am confused. Are you asking for U-Boot community or OE community?
How does that matter ? I am asking about the status of those patches and why they didn't make it upstream yet. Something should be done about that.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Automated update of the U-Boot recipe version is great and all, but that's not all that should be done when new version is released . The outstanding patches need to be rechecked every now and then too so they get upstream and don't start piling up in OE core.
You are the maintainer, so step up and do it. I did the upgrade as I had it here for testing so I thought it would be good to send it.
Right ... low-hanging fruit and all, so sad :-(
Let's see about those two patches then, they should be sorted out shortly ...
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Is anyone seeing u-boot-fw-utils.do_install failure with this?
u-boot-fw-utils/1_2017.09-r0/git/tools/env/fw_printenv: No such file or directory
I've tried u-boot-fw-utils-cross, but it fails as well even sooner in do_compile:
Log data follows:
| DEBUG: Executing shell function do_compile
| NOTE: make -j 32 ARCH=arm CC=gcc -isystemwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/include -O2 -pipe -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-O1 V=1 rpi_3_32b_config
| make -f ./scripts/Makefile.build obj=scripts/basic
| cc -Wp,-MD,scripts/basic/.fixdep.d -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -o scripts/basic/fixdep scripts/basic/fixdep.c
| /bin/sh: 1: cc: not found | make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 127 | make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 | ERROR: oe_runmake failed | WARNING: exit code 1 from a shell command. | ERROR: Function failed: do_compile (log file is located at
work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/temp/log.do_compile.12859)
ERROR: Task (virtual:cross:oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb:do_compile) failed with exit code '1'
Quoted 64 lines · Otavio Salvador
This upgrades the U-Boot to the 2017.09 release.
Signed-off-by Otavio Salvador <[email protected]>---
.../u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} | 2 +-
.../u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} | 0
.../u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} | 0
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb}
| 04 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} (89%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb}(100%)
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc +1
-1@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ PE = "1" # We use the revision in order to avoid having to fetch it from the # repo during parse -SRCREV = "d85ca029f257b53a96da6c2fb421e78a003a9943" +SRCREV = "c98ac3487e413c71e5d36322ef3324b21c6f60f9" SRC_URI = "git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git \ file://MPC8315ERDB-enable-DHCP.patch \meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.07.bb +0
-1--2.14.1
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
I've verified that u-boot-fw-utils builds and installs fw_printenv correctly with 2017.07.
And that u-boot-fw-utils-cross was broken even with Yocto 2.3 Pyro and 2017.01 version there, maybe it's time to remove cross version? As nobody is using it and it's not tested?
Quoted 105 lines · Martin Jansa
Is anyone seeing u-boot-fw-utils.do_install failure with this?
u-boot-fw-utils/1_2017.09-r0/git/tools/env/fw_printenv: No such file or directory
I've tried u-boot-fw-utils-cross, but it fails as well even sooner in
do_compile:Log data follows:
| DEBUG: Executing shell functiondo_compile
| NOTE: make -j 32 ARCH=arm CC=gcc -isystemwork/x86_64-linux/u- boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/include -O2(quoted diff) +0
-3-pipe -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64- linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017. 09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/ u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-O1 V=1
rpi_3_32b_config
| make -f./scripts/Makefile.buildobj=scripts/basic
| cc -Wp,-MD,scripts/basic/.fixdep.d -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -oscripts/basic/fixdepscripts/basic/fixdep.c| /bin/sh: 1: cc: not found | make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 127 | make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 | ERROR: oe_runmake failed | WARNING: exit code 1 from a shell command. | ERROR: Function failed: do_compile (log file is located atwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/temp/ log.do_compile.12859)
ERROR: Task (virtual:cross:oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw- utils_2017.09.bb:do_compile) failed with exit code '1'On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Otavio Salvador <[email protected]
Quoted 66 lines
wrote:
This upgrades the U-Boot to the 2017.09 release.
Signed-off-by Otavio Salvador <[email protected]>---
.../u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} | 2 +-
.../u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} | 0
.../u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} | 0
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb}
| 04 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} (89%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb}(100%)
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc +1
-1@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ PE = "1" # We use the revision in order to avoid having to fetch it from the # repo during parse -SRCREV = "d85ca029f257b53a96da6c2fb421e78a003a9943" +SRCREV = "c98ac3487e413c71e5d36322ef3324b21c6f60f9" SRC_URI = "git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git \ file://MPC8315ERDB-enable-DHCP.patch \meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.07.bb +0
-1--2.14.1
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
PATCH 1/1 u-boot: Upgrade to 2017.09
Quoted 6 lines · Martin Jansa
I've verified that u-boot-fw-utils builds and installs
fw_printenvcorrectly with 2017.07.And that u-boot-fw-utils-cross was broken even with Yocto 2.3 Pyro and 2017.01 version there, maybe it's time to remove cross version? As nobody is using it and it's not tested?
Nobody apparently even build-tested this patch before submission, gurrr.
Speaking of cross versions of U-Boot fwutils and printenv/setenv , they are used by boards for modifying U-Boot environment on the target from Linux, so removing them would break a lot of boards -- NAK.
Quoted 113 lines
Quoted 97 lines · Martin Jansa
Is anyone seeing u-boot-fw-utils.do_install failure with this?
u-boot-fw-utils/1_2017.09-r0/git/tools/env/fw_printenv: No such file or directory
I've tried u-boot-fw-utils-cross, but it fails as well even sooner in
do_compile:Log data follows:
| DEBUG: Executing shell functiondo_compile
| NOTE: make -j 32 ARCH=arm CC=gcc -isystemwork/x86_64-linux/u- boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/include -O2(quoted diff) +0
-3-pipe -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64- linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017. 09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/ u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-O1 V=1
rpi_3_32b_config
| make -f./scripts/Makefile.buildobj=scripts/basic
| cc -Wp,-MD,scripts/basic/.fixdep.d -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -oscripts/basic/fixdepscripts/basic/fixdep.c| /bin/sh: 1: cc: not found | make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 127 | make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 | ERROR: oe_runmake failed | WARNING: exit code 1 from a shell command. | ERROR: Function failed: do_compile (log file is located atwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/temp/ log.do_compile.12859)
ERROR: Task (virtual:cross:oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw- utils_2017.09.bb:do_compile) failed with exit code '1'On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Otavio Salvador <[email protected]
Quoted 60 lines
wrote:
This upgrades the U-Boot to the 2017.09 release.
Signed-off-by Otavio Salvador <[email protected]>---
.../u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} | 2 +-
.../u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} | 0
.../u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} | 0
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb}
| 04 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} (89%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb}(100%)
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc +1
-1@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ PE = "1" # We use the revision in order to avoid having to fetch it from the # repo during parse -SRCREV = "d85ca029f257b53a96da6c2fb421e78a003a9943" +SRCREV = "c98ac3487e413c71e5d36322ef3324b21c6f60f9" SRC_URI = "git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git \ file://MPC8315ERDB-enable-DHCP.patch \meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.07.bb +0
-1--2.14.1
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot at lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Marek Vasut
u-boot-fw-utils-cross is broken for at least a year, if it breaks a lot of boards, why nobody complained yet?
Quoted 138 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 6 lines · Martin Jansa
I've verified that u-boot-fw-utils builds and installs
fw_printenvcorrectly with 2017.07.And that u-boot-fw-utils-cross was broken even with Yocto 2.3 Pyro and 2017.01 version there, maybe it's time to remove cross version? As nobody is using it and it's not tested?
Nobody apparently even build-tested this patch before submission, gurrr.
Speaking of cross versions of U-Boot fwutils and printenv/setenv , they are used by boards for modifying U-Boot environment on the target from Linux, so removing them would break a lot of boards -- NAK.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines · Martin Jansa
Is anyone seeing u-boot-fw-utils.do_install failure with this?
u-boot-fw-utils/1_2017.09-r0/git/tools/env/fw_printenv: No such file or directory
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
I've tried u-boot-fw-utils-cross, but it fails as well even sooner in
do_compile:Log data follows:
| DEBUG: Executing shell functiondo_compile
| NOTE: make -j 32 ARCH=arm CC=gcc -isystemwork/x86_64-linux/u- boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/include -O2 -pipe -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
-Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/
recipe-sysroot-native/lib
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
-Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_ 2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64- linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017. 09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/ u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-O1
V=1
Quoted 16 lines
Quoted 16 lines
rpi_3_32b_config
| make -f./scripts/Makefile.buildobj=scripts/basic
| cc -Wp,-MD,scripts/basic/.fixdep.d -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -oscripts/basic/fixdepscripts/basic/fixdep.c| /bin/sh: 1: cc: not found | make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 127 | make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 | ERROR: oe_runmake failed | WARNING: exit code 1 from a shell command. | ERROR: Function failed: do_compile (log file is located atwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/temp/ log.do_compile.12859)
ERROR: Task (virtual:cross:oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw- utils_2017.09.bb:do_compile) failed with exit code '1'Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Otavio Salvador <
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
wrote:
This upgrades the U-Boot to the 2017.09 release.
Signed-off-by Otavio Salvador <[email protected]>---
Quoted 16 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
.../u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} | 2 +-
.../u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} | 0
.../u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} | 0
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb}
| 0Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
4 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} (89%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb =>u-boot_2017.09.bb}
Quoted 45 lines
Quoted 37 lines
Quoted 37 lines
(100%)
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc +1
-1@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ PE = "1" # We use the revision in order to avoid having to fetch it from the # repo during parse -SRCREV = "d85ca029f257b53a96da6c2fb421e78a003a9943" +SRCREV = "c98ac3487e413c71e5d36322ef3324b21c6f60f9" SRC_URI = "git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git \ file://MPC8315ERDB-enable-DHCP.patch \meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.07.bb +0
-1--2.14.1
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-coreQuoted 5 lines
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
PATCH 1/1 u-boot: Upgrade to 2017.09
Quoted 2 lines · Martin Jansa
u-boot-fw-utils-cross is broken for at least a year, if it breaks a lot of boards, why nobody complained yet?
Didn't you say it worked for 2017.07 or did I misunderstand that ?
btw stop top-posting please.
Quoted 173 lines
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:32 AM, Marek Vasut <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 09/17/2017 01:06 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: > I've verified that u-boot-fw-utils builds and installs fw_printenv > correctly with 2017.07. > > And that u-boot-fw-utils-cross was broken even with Yocto 2.3 Pyro > and 2017.01 version there, maybe it's time to remove cross version? As > nobody is using it and it's not tested? Nobody apparently even build-tested this patch before submission, gurrr. Speaking of cross versions of U-Boot fwutils and printenv/setenv , they are used by boards for modifying U-Boot environment on the target from Linux, so removing them would break a lot of boards -- NAK. > On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa at gmail.com <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > >> Is anyone seeing u-boot-fw-utils.do_install failure with this? >> >> u-boot-fw-utils/1_2017.09-r0/git/tools/env/fw_printenv: No such file or >> directory >> >> I've tried u-boot-fw-utils-cross, but it fails as well even sooner in >> do_compile: >> >> Log data follows: >> | DEBUG: Executing shell function do_compile >> | NOTE: make -j 32 ARCH=arm CC=gcc -isystemwork/x86_64-linux/u- >> boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/include -O2 >> -pipe -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib >> -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib >> -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_ >> 2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64- >> linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib >> -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017. >> 09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/ >> u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-O1 V=1 >> rpi_3_32b_config >> | make -f ./scripts/Makefile.build obj=scripts/basic >> | cc -Wp,-MD,scripts/basic/.fixdep.d -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 >> -fomit-frame-pointer -o scripts/basic/fixdep scripts/basic/fixdep.c >> | /bin/sh: 1: cc: not found >> | make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 127 >> | make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 >> | ERROR: oe_runmake failed >> | WARNING: exit code 1 from a shell command. >> | ERROR: Function failed: do_compile (log file is located at >> work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/temp/ >> log.do_compile.12859) >> ERROR: Task (virtual:cross:oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw- >> utils_2017.09.bb:do_compile) failed with exit code '1' >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Otavio Salvador <otavio at ossystems.com.br <mailto:[email protected]> >>> wrote: >> >>> This upgrades the U-Boot to the 2017.09 release. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> --- >>> >>> .../u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} >>> | 2 +- >>> .../u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb> => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb>} >>> | 0 >>> .../u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb> => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb>} >>> | 0 >>> meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot_2017.07.bb> => u-boot_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot_2017.09.bb>} >>> | 0 >>> 4 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => >>> u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} (89%) >>> rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb> => >>> u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb>} (100%) >>> rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb> => >>> u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb>} (100%) >>> rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot_2017.07.bb> => u-boot_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot_2017.09.bb>} >>> (100%) >>> >>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc >>> b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc >>> similarity index 89% >>> rename from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc >>> rename to meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc >>> index e37f5fd409..02e51242cb 100644 >>> --- a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc >>> +++ b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc >>> @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ PE = "1" >>> >>> # We use the revision in order to avoid having to fetch it from the >>> # repo during parse >>> -SRCREV = "d85ca029f257b53a96da6c2fb421e78a003a9943" >>> +SRCREV = "c98ac3487e413c71e5d36322ef3324b21c6f60f9" >>> >>> SRC_URI = "git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git <http://git.denx.de/u-boot.git> \ >>> file://MPC8315ERDB-enable-DHCP.patch \ >>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb> >>> b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb> >>> similarity index 100% >>> rename from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb> >>> rename to meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb> >>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb> >>> b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb> >>> similarity index 100% >>> rename from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb> >>> rename to meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb> >>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot_2017.07.bb> >>> b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot_2017.09.bb> >>> similarity index 100% >>> rename from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.07.bb <http://u-boot_2017.07.bb> >>> rename to meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.09.bb <http://u-boot_2017.09.bb> >>> -- >>> 2.14.1 >>> >>> -- >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Openembedded-core mailing list >>> Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org <mailto:[email protected]> >>> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core <http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core> >>> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> > -- Best regards, Marek Vasut
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Quoted 5 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 2 lines · Martin Jansa
u-boot-fw-utils-cross is broken for at least a year, if it breaks a lot of boards, why nobody complained yet?
Didn't you say it worked for 2017.07 or did I misunderstand that ?
u-boot-fw-utils did work, u-boot-fw-utils-cross no, read it again:
And that u-boot-fw-utils-cross was broken even with Yocto 2.3 Pyro and 2017.01 version there, maybe it's time to remove cross version? As nobody is using it and it's not tested?
Quoted 5 lines · Martin Jansa
Quoted 4 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 2 lines · Martin Jansa
u-boot-fw-utils-cross is broken for at least a year, if it breaks a lot of boards, why nobody complained yet?
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
Didn't you say it worked for 2017.07 or did I misunderstand that ?
u-boot-fw-utils did work, u-boot-fw-utils-cross no, read it again:
And that u-boot-fw-utils-cross was broken even with Yocto 2.3 Pyro and 2017.01 version there, maybe it's time to remove cross version? As nobody is using it and it's not tested?
What is the policy on doing u-boot version upgrades this late in the release cycle? SHouldn't this wait until after the release?
Philip
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 516 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20170918/7a062495/attachment.sig>
Em 18 de set de 2017 12:20 PM, "Philip Balister" <[email protected]> escreveu:
Quoted 5 lines · Martin Jansa
Quoted 4 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 2 lines · Martin Jansa
u-boot-fw-utils-cross is broken for at least a year, if it breaks a lot of boards, why nobody complained yet?
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
Didn't you say it worked for 2017.07 or did I misunderstand that ?
u-boot-fw-utils did work, u-boot-fw-utils-cross no, read it again:
And that u-boot-fw-utils-cross was broken even with Yocto 2.3 Pyro and 2017.01 version there, maybe it's time to remove cross version? As nobody is using it and it's not tested?
What is the policy on doing u-boot version upgrades this late in the release cycle? SHouldn't this wait until after the release?
Why?
It is just another recipe and we are upgrading to the final release.
As Martin said, it was already broken.
I'll take the responsibility to fix it. But as other packages, upgrades has risk and we have more than enough time to proper fix it.
Quoted 5 lines · Otavio Salvador
What is the policy on doing u-boot version upgrades this late in the
release cycle? SHouldn't this wait until after the release?
Quoted 9 lines
Why?
It is just another recipe and we are upgrading to the final release.
As Martin said, it was already broken.
I'll take the responsibility to fix it. But as other packages, upgrades has risk and we have more than enough time to proper fix it.
Why? Because it was merged to master after the freeze.
Personally I'm of the opinion that u-boot is one of those special recipes that if an upgrade appears just after freeze, we consider it. If we don't keep it up to date BSPs won't use the recipe, and we'll be back to every BSP layer containing its own special copy of the u-boot recipe.
Ross
Quoted 18 lines · Ross
Quoted 5 lines · Otavio Salvador
What is the policy on doing u-boot version upgrades this late in the
release cycle? SHouldn't this wait until after the release?
Quoted 9 lines
Why?
It is just another recipe and we are upgrading to the final release.
As Martin said, it was already broken.
I'll take the responsibility to fix it. But as other packages, upgrades has risk and we have more than enough time to proper fix it.
Quoted 6 lines
Why? Because it was merged to master after the freeze.
Personally I'm of the opinion that u-boot is one of those special recipes that if an upgrade appears just after freeze, we consider it. If we don't keep it up to date BSPs won't use the recipe, and we'll be back to every BSP layer containing its own special copy of the u-boot recipe.
Also please note that U-Boot has a rather regular and public release
schedule: http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/ReleaseCycle so you can have a good idea beforehand if you want to grab something for a release or not.
Personally, I would like to see this in. But the security issue that's been disclosed now is "resolved" just by not enabling functionality that no one was enabling in mainline, and will be removed in the next release, so don't feel you need to pull it in on those grounds.
Signature · 8 lines
Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20170918/e77d5853/attachment.sig>
Quoted 26 lines · Tom Rini
Quoted 18 lines · Ross
Quoted 5 lines · Otavio Salvador
What is the policy on doing u-boot version upgrades this late in the
release cycle? SHouldn't this wait until after the release?
Quoted 9 lines
Why?
It is just another recipe and we are upgrading to the final release.
As Martin said, it was already broken.
I'll take the responsibility to fix it. But as other packages, upgrades has risk and we have more than enough time to proper fix it.
Quoted 6 lines
Why? Because it was merged to master after the freeze.
Personally I'm of the opinion that u-boot is one of those special recipes that if an upgrade appears just after freeze, we consider it. If we don't keep it up to date BSPs won't use the recipe, and we'll be back to every BSP layer containing its own special copy of the u-boot recipe.
Quoted 8 lines
Also please note that U-Boot has a rather regular and public release
schedule: http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/ReleaseCycle so you can have a good idea beforehand if you want to grab something for a release or not.Personally, I would like to see this in. But the security issue that's been disclosed now is "resolved" just by not enabling functionality that no one was enabling in mainline, and will be removed in the next release, so don't feel you need to pull it in on those grounds.
I agree that the 2017.09 upgrade is a good idea.
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Quoted 31 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 30 lines · Tom Rini
Quoted 18 lines · Ross
Quoted 5 lines · Otavio Salvador
What is the policy on doing u-boot version upgrades this late in the
release cycle? SHouldn't this wait until after the release?
Quoted 9 lines
Why?
It is just another recipe and we are upgrading to the final release.
As Martin said, it was already broken.
I'll take the responsibility to fix it. But as other packages, upgrades has risk and we have more than enough time to proper fix it.
Quoted 6 lines
Why? Because it was merged to master after the freeze.
Personally I'm of the opinion that u-boot is one of those special recipes that if an upgrade appears just after freeze, we consider it. If we don't keep it up to date BSPs won't use the recipe, and we'll be back to every BSP layer containing its own special copy of the u-boot recipe.
Also please note that U-Boot has a rather regular and public release
schedule: http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/ReleaseCycle so you can have a good idea beforehand if you want to grab something for a release or not.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Personally, I would like to see this in. But the security issue that's been disclosed now is "resolved" just by not enabling functionality that no one was enabling in mainline, and will be removed in the next release, so don't feel you need to pull it in on those grounds.
I agree that the 2017.09 upgrade is a good idea.
OK, I just wanted to make sure everyone was on the same page about timing of the update. We certainly don't want very many recipes to decide they are special and take version bumps right up to release.
Philip
Quoted 37 lines · Philip Balister
Quoted 36 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 34 lines · Tom Rini
Quoted 18 lines · Ross
Quoted 5 lines · Otavio Salvador
What is the policy on doing u-boot version upgrades this late in the
release cycle? SHouldn't this wait until after the release?
Quoted 9 lines
Why?
It is just another recipe and we are upgrading to the final release.
As Martin said, it was already broken.
I'll take the responsibility to fix it. But as other packages, upgrades has risk and we have more than enough time to proper fix it.
Quoted 6 lines
Why? Because it was merged to master after the freeze.
Personally I'm of the opinion that u-boot is one of those special recipes that if an upgrade appears just after freeze, we consider it. If we don't keep it up to date BSPs won't use the recipe, and we'll be back to every BSP layer containing its own special copy of the u-boot recipe.
Also please note that U-Boot has a rather regular and public release
schedule: http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/ReleaseCycle so you can have a good idea beforehand if you want to grab something for a release or not.Personally, I would like to see this in. But the security issue that's been disclosed now is "resolved" just by not enabling functionality that no one was enabling in mainline, and will be removed in the next release, so don't feel you need to pull it in on those grounds.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I agree that the 2017.09 upgrade is a good idea.
OK, I just wanted to make sure everyone was on the same page about timing of the update. We certainly don't want very many recipes to decide they are special and take version bumps right up to release.
Agreed. So what is the conclusion here about this , are we updating to 2017.09 or not ?
Quoted 3 lines
Philip
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Hi Marek,
Quoted 41 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 40 lines · Philip Balister
Quoted 38 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 26 lines · Tom Rini
Quoted 18 lines · Ross
Quoted 5 lines · Otavio Salvador
What is the policy on doing u-boot version upgrades this late in the
release cycle? SHouldn't this wait until after the release?
Quoted 9 lines
Why?
It is just another recipe and we are upgrading to the final release.
As Martin said, it was already broken.
I'll take the responsibility to fix it. But as other packages, upgrades has risk and we have more than enough time to proper fix it.
Quoted 6 lines
Why? Because it was merged to master after the freeze.
Personally I'm of the opinion that u-boot is one of those special recipes that if an upgrade appears just after freeze, we consider it. If we don't keep it up to date BSPs won't use the recipe, and we'll be back to every BSP layer containing its own special copy of the u-boot recipe.
Quoted 8 lines
Also please note that U-Boot has a rather regular and public release
schedule: http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/ReleaseCycle so you can have a good idea beforehand if you want to grab something for a release or not.Personally, I would like to see this in. But the security issue that's been disclosed now is "resolved" just by not enabling functionality that no one was enabling in mainline, and will be removed in the next release, so don't feel you need to pull it in on those grounds.
I agree that the 2017.09 upgrade is a good idea.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
OK, I just wanted to make sure everyone was on the same page about timing of the update. We certainly don't want very many recipes to decide they are special and take version bumps right up to release.
Agreed. So what is the conclusion here about this , are we updating to 2017.09 or not ?
+1 for upgrade.
- morats
Quoted 14 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Philip
--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Quoted 2 lines · Marek Vasut
Agreed. So what is the conclusion here about this , are we updating to 2017.09 or not ?
It was already merged couple days ago:
http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=340d413f678a4a64dfa060e8fe0ac721b73fed97
and the follow-up fix for u-boot-fw-utils as well:
http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=73afabf8e69019f08b424a06f3eafaab052b0606
Signature · 1 line
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected]
Quoted 10 lines · Martin Jansa
Quoted 2 lines · Marek Vasut
Agreed. So what is the conclusion here about this , are we updating to 2017.09 or not ?
It was already merged couple days ago:
http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=340d413f678a4a64dfa060e8fe0ac721b73fed97and the follow-up fix for u-boot-fw-utils as well:
http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=73afabf8e69019f08b424a06f3eafaab052b0606
Super, thanks.
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Quoted 2 lines · Martin Jansa
Is anyone seeing u-boot-fw-utils.do_install failure with this?
I am seeing same failures too. havent yet dug into it.
Quoted 108 lines
u-boot-fw-utils/1_2017.09-r0/git/tools/env/fw_printenv: No such file or directory
I've tried u-boot-fw-utils-cross, but it fails as well even sooner in
do_compile:Log data follows:
| DEBUG: Executing shell functiondo_compile
| NOTE: make -j 32 ARCH=arm CC=gcc(quoted diff) +0
-9-isystemwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/include -O2 -pipe -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-O1 V=1 rpi_3_32b_config| make -f
./scripts/Makefile.buildobj=scripts/basic
| cc -Wp,-MD,scripts/basic/.fixdep.d -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -oscripts/basic/fixdepscripts/basic/fixdep.c| /bin/sh: 1: cc: not found | make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 127 | make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 | ERROR: oe_runmake failed | WARNING: exit code 1 from a shell command. | ERROR: Function failed: do_compile (log file is located atwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/temp/log.do_compile.12859)
ERROR: Task (virtual:cross:oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb:do_compile) failed with exit code '1'Quoted 59 lines · Otavio Salvador
This upgrades the U-Boot to the 2017.09 release.
Signed-off-by Otavio Salvador <[email protected]>---
.../u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} |
2 +-
.../u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} |
0
.../u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} |
0
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb} |
04 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} (89%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} (100%) rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb}(100%)
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc +1
-1@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ PE = "1" # We use the revision in order to avoid having to fetch it from the # repo during parse -SRCREV = "d85ca029f257b53a96da6c2fb421e78a003a9943" +SRCREV = "c98ac3487e413c71e5d36322ef3324b21c6f60f9" SRC_URI = "git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git \ file://MPC8315ERDB-enable-DHCP.patch \meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.07.bb +0
-1--2.14.1
Quoted 5 lines
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
PATCH 1/1 u-boot: Upgrade to 2017.09
Hi Khem,
Quoted 5 lines · Martin Jansa
Quoted 2 lines
Is anyone seeing u-boot-fw-utils.do_install failure with this?
I am seeing same failures too. havent yet dug into it.
Please pay note to change in directory structure in u-boot envs (from 2017.09):
Now to build fw_printenv one needs to run:
do_compile () {
oe_runmake ${UBOOT_MACHINE}
oe_runmake envtools (<- was env)
}And Yes, I do agree with Marek, fw_printf is widely used on many, many boards .....
Quoted 114 lines
Quoted 95 lines
u-boot-fw-utils/1_2017.09-r0/git/tools/env/fw_printenv: No such file or directory
I've tried u-boot-fw-utils-cross, but it fails as well even sooner in
do_compile:Log data follows:
| DEBUG: Executing shell functiondo_compile
| NOTE: make -j 32 ARCH=arm CC=gcc(quoted diff) +0
-9-isystemwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/include -O2 -pipe -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Lwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath-link,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath,work/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/lib -Wl,-O1 V=1 rpi_3_32b_config| make -f
./scripts/Makefile.buildobj=scripts/basic
| cc -Wp,-MD,scripts/basic/.fixdep.d -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -oscripts/basic/fixdepscripts/basic/fixdep.c| /bin/sh: 1: cc: not found | make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 127 | make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 | ERROR: oe_runmake failed | WARNING: exit code 1 from a shell command. | ERROR: Function failed: do_compile (log file is located atwork/x86_64-linux/u-boot-fw-utils-cross/1_2017.09-r0/temp/log.do_compile.12859)
ERROR: Task (virtual:cross:oe-core/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb:do_compile) failed with exit code '1'Quoted 59 lines · Otavio Salvador
This upgrades the U-Boot to the 2017.09 release.
Signed-off-by Otavio Salvador <[email protected]>---
.../u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc => u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} |
2 +-
.../u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb => u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} |
0
.../u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb => u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} |
0
meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb} |
04 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-common_2017.07.inc =>
u-boot-common_2017.09.inc} (89%)
rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb =>
u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb} (100%)
rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb =>
u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb} (100%)
rename meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/{u-boot_2017.07.bb => u-boot_2017.09.bb}
(100%)meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.09.inc renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-common_2017.07.inc +1
-1@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ PE = "1" # We use the revision in order to avoid having to fetch it from the # repo during parse -SRCREV = "d85ca029f257b53a96da6c2fb421e78a003a9943" +SRCREV = "c98ac3487e413c71e5d36322ef3324b21c6f60f9" SRC_URI = "git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git \ file://MPC8315ERDB-enable-DHCP.patch \meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fw-utils_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2017.07.bb +0
-0meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.09.bb renamed from meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2017.07.bb +0
-1--2.14.1
Quoted 14 lines
Quoted 5 lines
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot at lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Signature · 9 lines
Best regards, Lukasz Majewski -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Quoted 1 line · Khem Raj
I am seeing same failures too. havent yet dug into it.
Same here.
Jackie said that he's going to investigate now.
We've only seen this failure since 2017-09-15 06:00 AM ET after we rebased onto 2017-09-14 content/ this commit:
583dca2 meta/conf/layers.conf: Add ca-certificates as ABISAFE 75e918d linux-firmware: package Marvell PCIe WiFi firmwares 0001cee insane: don't pass skip list to functions which don't ... 340d413 u-boot: Upgrade to 2017.09
...
Signature · 2 lines
# Randy MacLeod. WR Linux # Wind River an Intel Company