[OE-core] [PATCH v2 09/10] binutils.inc: add vardep on multiarch DISTRO_FEATURE

[McClintock Matthew-B29882]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Matthew McClintock <msm at freescale.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:32 AM, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2012-09-27 at 20:33 -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote:
>>> binutils will build differently if this feature is enabled, so
>>> make the do_configure step depend on it
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Matthew McClintock <msm at freescale.com>
>>> ---
>>> Not sure if we should try to fix via configure options
>>>
>>> v2: update commit message a bit
>>>
>>>  meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc |    2 ++
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc b/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc
>>> index ee748a4..ff64882 100644
>>> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc
>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc
>>> @@ -80,6 +80,8 @@ export CC_FOR_BUILD = "LD_LIBRARY_PATH= ${BUILD_CC}"
>>>  export CPP_FOR_BUILD = "${BUILD_CPP}"
>>>  export CFLAGS_FOR_BUILD = "${BUILD_CFLAGS}"
>>>
>>> +MULTIARCH := "${@bb.utils.contains("DISTRO_FEATURES", "multiarch", "yes", "no", d)}"
>>> +do_configure[vardeps] += "MULTIARCH"
>>>  do_configure () {
>>>       (cd ${S}; gnu-configize) || die "Failed to run gnu-configize"
>>>       oe_runconf
>>
>> This doesn't make sense. oe_runconf should depend on EXTRA_OECONF and
>> that should depend on DISTRO_FEATURES so the dependency should already
>> exist?
>
> OK, maybe... let me just explain what I did to see an issue.
>
> Let's say I did a build without MULTIARCH and everything went fine.
> Then I went back and added mutliarch. binutils would not rebuild with
> the new features and things would break. With this patch, after added
> multiarch binutils would rebuild and the the build work OK.
>
> As you say though, if this was an actual dep it should have rebuilt
> already? Has anything changed in this area very recently?

Looking closer it seems like EXTRA_OECONF does not do this quite right
when resolving base_contains parameters:

List of dependencies for variable EXTRA_OECONF is
set(['gettext_oeconf', 'STAGING_DIR_TARGET', 'base_contains',
'TARGET_PREFIX'])

-M