[OE-core] [PATCHv2 0/3] u-boot recipe updates

[Paul Gortmaker]

[Re: [PATCHv2 0/3] u-boot recipe updates] On 03/07/2012 (Tue 10:48) Saul Wold wrote:

> On 07/01/2012 10:44 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> >These are the oe-core updates required so that yocto can do
> >a successful build of a working u-boot image for the mpc8315
> >reference BSP.
> >
> >In v2, I've fixed up the issue where TARGET_PREFIX accidentally became
> >specific to the one single recipe.  That made the 3/3 patch in v1 no
> >longer required.  However, when build testing, I noticed that we
> >were needlessly clobbering PARALLEL_MAKE for u-boot, which is not
> >at all required, and just slows down builds.  So a new patch is
> >added to fix that, and we still have three total.
> >
> >I've built for the beagleboard with -j8 (twice), and the same for
> >the 8315 BSP.  I've also always built u-boot with -j10 or greater
> >for countless powerpc images I've made in the last 1/2 dozen years.
> >Looking at the git history, it appears this just came in with some
> >large import, versus being an actively chosen individual setting.
> >
> >The 8315 specific patch that was sent to the yocto list earlier to
> >enable building it (u-boot.bin) by default is unchanged, but I can
> >resend that if it helps somehow.
> >
> >Paul.
> >---
> >
> >Paul Gortmaker (3):
> >   u-boot: Don't make the -Os removal part of global settings.
> >   u-boot: make FILESDIR a shared setting.
> >   u-boot: do not clobber PARALLEL_MAKE setting
> >
> Took in patches 1 & 3 into OE-Core

Thanks!

> 
> Looking for an update for FILESDIR -> FILESPATH as suggested by Richard.

I've not seen Richard's feedback, since I'm OOO, and with the To/Cc:
stripped, it has got archived vs. staying in my inbox.  [They get
archived, because just like LKML, I'm not going to pretend I can read
all poky/oe mail on the very day it arrives.]

On a related note, is it possible to fix the mailing list so that it
does not strip To/Cc information and Message-ID strings?  [I'd have to
check -- maybe it is (also) inserting a needless Reply-To: header that
messes things up.]

Further, without a proper Message-ID, it breaks patchworks, so Richard's
comments should be here:

http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/30879/

but unfortunately they are not.  The netdev and ppc dev lists for linux
use patchworks and have the follow-up review comments captured and it is
really quite useful to all (esp. the person who has to triage and
decruftify patchworks content/state once a month...)

Finally, I can't even find it in the June/July archives:

https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/poky/2012-July/subject.html

Just thought it worth a mention, in case it hasn't been mentioned
before.  Fixing these little quirks would lower the barrier to entry
and the frustration factor for new contributors.  If I can help out
somehow with testing a fix, let me know.

Thanks,
Paul.
--

> 
> Thanks
> 	Sau!
> 
> 
> >  meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc           |    6 ++----
> >  meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2011.03.bb    |    2 --
> >  meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2011.06.bb    |    2 --
> >  meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2012.04.01.bb |    2 --
> >  4 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >