[OE-core] [PATCH] linux-yocto-3.4: Disable extra slang header search path

[Bruce Ashfield]

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:17 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
<B29882 at freescale.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:25 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
>> <B29882 at freescale.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Bruce Ashfield
>>> <bruce.ashfield at windriver.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:18 PM, Bruce Ashfield
>>>> <bruce.ashfield at windriver.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 12-08-07 10:16 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Bruce Ashfield
>>>>>> <bruce.ashfield at windriver.com>  wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12-08-07 09:50 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 09:24 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 12-08-07 07:17 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Add in a workaround to avoid host infection detection build failures
>>>>>>>>>> from the slang include directory in perf. I'll defer to Bruce to
>>>>>>>>>> fix this properly but we need a workaround now as this is breaking
>>>>>>>>>> builds.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just followed up on a patch from 3 days ago, but I'll follow up here
>>>>>>>>> as well .. just to make sure the message gets through.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We had a pending patch to fix this issue from Liang Li here @
>>>>>>>>> windriver.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Did that patch not fix the problem, or did it fall through the cracks ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is not correct. It adds in another search path and just hides the
>>>>>>>> issue. We should *never* be putting -I/usr/include/slang on the compiler
>>>>>>>> commandline at all period.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd argue that it's more correct than commenting out the upstream
>>>>>>> include path.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It fixes the problem, doesn't require a patch to the kernel and give
>>>>>>> us time to work upstream and get a real fix.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So I'd really prefer that we take that fix, versus the kernel patch
>>>>>>> if it actually fixes the problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd assumed in all the email traffic that this was clear and that
>>>>>>>> another solution was being worked on that would be acceptable upstream
>>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Exactly what I referred to above. But we don't want a temporary
>>>>>>> kernel path, we want the temporary recipe patch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps a better option might be: -I=/usr/include/slang ? That assumes
>>>>>>>> that all kernel gcc versions would accept the = notation, that should be
>>>>>>>> true by now?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not in my experience when dealing with the upstream kernel and tools,
>>>>>>> there are plenty of old compilers floating around.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, I'm not following this thread super close.. will all kernel
>>>>>> trees need to apply this patch? That does not seem ideal...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They would, once we get the patch merged upstream. And you are right,
>>>>> linux-yocto is easy enough, but that's one set of kernel trees.
>>>>
>>>> I should add, that not all trees, and only builds that use a
>>>> particular set of perf
>>>> features out of master would see this problem (as far as I know), so I didn't
>>>> mean to make this sound bigger than it is ... it's just something that master
>>>> was hitting on the autobuilders (and who knows, maybe I'm mischaracterizing
>>>> the problem as well :)
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Bruce
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The patch that we proposed to the perf recipe would fix it for all
>>>>> users of that recipe, with a suitable set of kernels (say 3.0 to
>>>>> 3.6 (I haven't checked).
>>>>>
>>>>> Honestly, that's why we proposed a perf recipe fix, while working on the
>>>>> right fix for the upstream kernel.
>>>
>>> It seems wrong to need a kernel patch to fix this issue, kernels are
>>> built outside of oe-core and it seems better to fix things in one
>>> place. By the way, I'm seeing this on our kernel recipe in
>>> meta-fsl-ppc too.
>>
>> Have you tried the patch from Liang Li @ Windriver ? Sent last Friday,
>> it should solve your
>> immediate problem .. it solved ours.
>
> http://patches.openembedded.org/project/oe-core/list/?submitter=5585

http://patches.openembedded.org/patch/33745/

Bruce

>
> which version?
>
> -M
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>>>
>>> -M
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>>> Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
>>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
>> thee at its end"
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>> Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core



-- 
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
thee at its end"