Hob: Workaround for RPM architecture renaming issue
Hi Richard,
This pull request contains a workaround for RPM architecture renaming issue.
Please help to review and pull.
Thanks,
Dongxiao
The following changes since commit 48ef8dbb0d1bdbc7e0e62665b5112282637f3266:
lsb: Fix PR bump, fix bashisms, correct dependency issue, tweak package description (2012-04-18 12:06:48 +0100)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib dxu4/hob-bugfix-oecore
http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=dxu4/hob-bugfix-oecore
Dongxiao Xu (1):
packageinfo.bbclass: A workaround for RPM architecture renaming
meta/classes/packageinfo.bbclass | 13 ++++++++++++- 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
1.7.4.1
PATCH 1/1 packageinfo.bbclass: A workaround for RPM architecture renaming
For beagleboard platform, the PACKAGE_ARCH for certain recipes is "armv7a-vfp-neon", however, the architecture label in RPM file name is "arm" due to a potential bug in RPM backend.
This commit is a workaround to make Hob work in this case.
--- meta/classes/packageinfo.bbclass | 13 ++++++++++++- 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
meta/classes/packageinfo.bbclass +12 -1
@@ -20,14 +20,25 @@ python packageinfo_handler () { pkgrename = sdata['PKG_%s' % pkgname] pkgv = sdata['PKGV'].replace('-', '+') pkgr = sdata['PKGR'] + # We found there are some renaming issue with certain architecture. + # For example, armv7a-vfp-neon, it will use armv7a in the rpm file. This is the workaround for it. + arch_tmp = arch.split('-')[0] if os.path.exists(deploy_dir + '/' + arch + '/' + \ pkgname + '-' + pkgv + '-' + pkgr + '.' + arch + '.' + packaging) or \ os.path.exists(deploy_dir + '/' + arch + '/' + \ + pkgname + '-' + pkgv + '-' + pkgr + '.' + arch_tmp + '.' + packaging) or \ + os.path.exists(deploy_dir + '/' + arch + '/' + \ pkgrename + '-' + pkgv + '-' + pkgr + '.' + arch + '.' + packaging) or \ os.path.exists(deploy_dir + '/' + arch + '/' + \ + pkgrename + '-' + pkgv + '-' + pkgr + '.' + arch_tmp + '.' + packaging) or \ + os.path.exists(deploy_dir + '/' + arch + '/' + \ pkgname + '_' + pkgv + '-' + pkgr + '_' + arch + '.' + packaging) or \ os.path.exists(deploy_dir + '/' + arch + '/' + \ - pkgrename + '_' + pkgv + '-' + pkgr + '_' + arch + '.' + packaging): + pkgname + '_' + pkgv + '-' + pkgr + '_' + arch_tmp + '.' + packaging) or \ + os.path.exists(deploy_dir + '/' + arch + '/' + \ + pkgrename + '_' + pkgv + '-' + pkgr + '_' + arch + '.' + packaging) or \ + os.path.exists(deploy_dir + '/' + arch + '/' + \ + pkgrename + '_' + pkgv + '-' + pkgr + '_' + arch_tmp + '.' + packaging): pkginfolist.append(sdata) bb.event.fire(bb.event.PackageInfo(pkginfolist), e.data) }
Signature · 1 line
1.7.4.1
Re: [PATCH 1/1] packageinfo.bbclass: A workaround for RPM architecture renaming
Op 18 apr. 2012, om 14:48 heeft Dongxiao Xu het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 3 lines
For beagleboard platform, the
PACKAGE_ARCHfor certain recipes is "armv7a-vfp-neon", however, the architecture label in RPM file name is "arm" due to a potential bug in RPM backend.
'arm' or 'armv7a'? Your commit message doesn't match the comment in the code.
regards,
Koen
Re: [PATCH 1/1] packageinfo.bbclass: A workaround for RPM architecture renaming
Quoted 7 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 18 apr. 2012, om 14:48 heeft Dongxiao Xu het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 3 lines
For beagleboard platform, the
PACKAGE_ARCHfor certain recipes is "armv7a-vfp-neon", however, the architecture label in RPM file name is "arm" due to a potential bug in RPM backend.'arm' or 'armv7a'? Your commit message doesn't match the comment in the code.
Since Dongxiao is probably about to go to sleep, he means "armv7a". I'd wondered that when I looked at the commit message too.
Cheers,
Richard
Re: [PATCH 1/1] packageinfo.bbclass: A workaround for RPM architecture renaming
Quoted 11 lines · Richard Purdie
Quoted 7 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 18 apr. 2012, om 14:48 heeft Dongxiao Xu het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 3 lines
For beagleboard platform, the
PACKAGE_ARCHfor certain recipes is "armv7a-vfp-neon", however, the architecture label in RPM file name is "arm" due to a potential bug in RPM backend.'arm' or 'armv7a'? Your commit message doesn't match the comment in the code.
Since Dongxiao is probably about to go to sleep, he means "armv7a". I'd wondered that when I looked at the commit message too.
Sorry for the typo, it is "armv7a". I've fixed it in my branch.
Thanks,
Dongxiao
Quoted 10 lines
Cheers,
Richard
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Saul Wold
AppliedQuoted 17 lines · Dongxiao Xu
Hi Richard,
This pull request contains a workaround for RPM architecture renaming issue.
Please help to review and pull.
Thanks,
DongxiaoThe following changes since commit
48ef8dbb0d1bdbc7e0e62665b5112282637f3266:lsb: Fix PR bump, fix bashisms, correct dependency issue, tweak package description (2012-04-18 12:06:48 +0100)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contribdxu4/hob-bugfix-oecore
http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=dxu4/hob-bugfix-oecore
Quoted 6 lines
Dongxiao Xu (1):
packageinfo.bbclass: A workaround for RPM architecture renamingmeta/classes/packageinfo.bbclass | 13 ++++++++++++- 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Merged into OE-Core
Thanks
Sau!