[OE-core] [PATCH 4/5] gtk-icon-cache: call postinst scriplet at do_rootfs time

[Andreas Müller]

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Laurentiu Palcu
<laurentiu.palcu at intel.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 08/06/2012 11:10 AM, Andreas Müller wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Laurentiu Palcu
>> <laurentiu.palcu at intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/06/2012 01:49 AM, Andreas Müller wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 12:30 AM, Andreas Müller
>>>> <schnitzeltony at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Laurentiu Palcu
>>>>> <laurentiu.palcu at intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>> You could give it a test yourselves and let me know your results. I will
>>>>>> send a version 2 of the patchset(as soon as we all agree on the
>>>>>> solution), with some changes suggested by Mark and some PR bumps
>>>>>> suggested by Koen.
>>>>> With the image I usually work with [1] and AMD Phenom II X6 1090 16GB
>>>>> RAM I get a measurable delay - see attachment. I would not be happy
>>>>> loosing latest do_rootfs enhancements (off topic - thanks for that).
>>>>> Remeber we are only talking of gtk-update-icon-cache. OK I could buy
>>>>> an intel host and work just with sato images but...
>>> I suppose you could, but nobody asked you to do that, it's your choice
>>> what's your build machine or what you'll be building for.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the measurements though. They do, indeed, show quite a
>>> significant amount of time (around 6 minutes). A run-once solution is to
>>> be considered in this case.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andreas
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://gitorious.org/schnitzeltony-oe-meta/meta-misc/blobs/master/recipes-image/xfce-full-image.bb
>>>> OK I know it is not that important: The image created with this patch
>>>> series creates tons of messages like
>>> Why do you think is not important. Please elaborate. Or is it irony?
>> Yes sorry - it was late night.
> It's OK, let's work together and find the best solution for all of us. I
> would also be pissed of if I had to wait an extra 6 minutes every
> do_rootfs run.
>
>>> I don't think is in anybody's benefit if you take this approach. :) All
>>> errors/warnings are important and they have to be taken care of.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> xfdesktop:446): GdkPixbuf-WARNING **: Cannot open pixbuf loader module
>>>> file '/usr/lib/gdk-pixbuf-2.0/2.10.0/loaders.cache': No such file or
>>>> directory
>>>>
>>>> and don't have icons at all. Did you run test that (on a hardware
>>>> plattform different to your host)?
>>> I only tested on qemu. And it worked just fine, without any errors. With
>>> all icons in place.
>> Which hardware did you emulate? My tests were done for overo (ARM
>> cortext A8). I wonder if the created database is machine specific.
> I used qemuarm. As far as I know, the database shouldn't be machine
> specific. And, looking at the log you sent, it looks like all commands
> succeeded. Otherwise, the 'time' application would also signal in the
> log file if the command failed. Could please have a look, on your host
> (xfce-full-image-1.0-r0/rootfs/usr/share/icons/hicolor or
> xfce-full-image-1.0-r0/rootfs/usr/share/icons/gnome), to see if it
> creates the icon-theme.cache files? It does for me and I don't
> understand why it doesn't in your case...
>
I will check today evening since the machine with this data is at home...

Andreas