[OE-core] MIPS vs MIPS32 tunings -- summary and questions

[Richard Purdie]

On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 13:54 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 01:45:54PM +0200, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> > On 18.04.2012 13:40, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 13:30 +0200, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> > >> now, after having repacked all binary tarballs that had mipsel or
> > >> mipsel-nf in their name and contents, and after having changed all
> > >> occurrences of mipsel and mipsel-nf in my local recipes (where
> > >> appropriate), and after having rebuilt everything from scratch again, it
> > >> came to my attention that "mipsel" in PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS breaks opkg,
> > >> because no mipsel packages are being generated. That's what I told
> > >> before, right?
> > > 
> > > How is this breaking opkg? We often have architectures listed in there
> > > for which there are no packages generated (all, noarch and any spring to
> > > mind)?
> > 
> > Downloading http://10.0.0.1/mipsel/Packages.gz.
> > wget: server returned error: HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found
> > Collected errors:
> >  * opkg_download: Failed to download http://10.0.0.1/mipsel/Packages.gz, wget returned 1.
> 
> I had a lot of those (e.g. because armv7a-vfp-neon was including 20
> arm*feed.conf variants in /etc/opkg most of them empty - without
> Packages.gz).
> 
> So I've added "filter" to distro-feed-configs
> http://git.shr-project.org/git/?p=meta-smartphone.git;a=commit;h=236aa553bb0f82f741c6edb793e96f421f24f4fa
> to add only feeds I'm generating (and I also don't want armv5* packages
> installed on armv7a-vfp-neon target unless user explicitly adds armv5*
> feed).

This is the better solution. I think we need to get a better default
feed-config generation mechanism into the core. Distros may still need
to tweak it but it would be good to share some of the best practises...

Cheers,

Richard