[OE-core] [PATCH] bdwgc: support configure on autoconf <2.69
Joe MacDonald
joe at deserted.net
Wed Jun 19 15:09:34 UTC 2013
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Richard Purdie <
richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 10:50 -0400, Joe MacDonald wrote:
> > Adding the oe-core list back to the cc list since I accidentally
> > dropped the list on my first response.
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Richard Purdie
> > <richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 10:15 -0400, Joe MacDonald wrote:
> > >
> > >
> >
> > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Richard Purdie
> > > <richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 09:56 -0400, joe at deserted.net
> > wrote:
> > > > From: Joe MacDonald <joe at deserted.net>
> > > >
> > > > Building bdwgc-native on systems with older
> > versions of
> > > autoconf (earlier
> > > > than 2.69) is known to have issues:
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/ivmai/bdwgc/issues/16
> > > >
> > > > An option is to simply mask the errors with
> > > m4_pattern_allow(...) for each
> > > > of the macros, but rerunning autoreconf produces a
> > > functional configure
> > > > script that builds a functional native version of
> > bdwgc.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Joe MacDonald <joe at deserted.net>
> > > > ---
> > > > meta/recipes-support/bdwgc/bdwgc_7.2d.bb | 9
> > +++++++++
> > > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > I tripped over this yesterday on one of my older
> > builders.
> > > It happens to still
> > > > be Ubuntu 12.04.2. I don't know if it's unique to
> > my
> > > configuration, but after
> > > > doing some digging around on the web I can't see
> > any obvious
> > > indications that
> > > > I'm missing any autotools package and the general
> > consensus
> > > seems to be that
> > > > autoreconf is the best option when the failures
> > are
> > > relatively beign as they
> > > > are here.
> > > >
> > > > -J.
> > > >
> > > > diff --git
> > a/meta/recipes-support/bdwgc/bdwgc_7.2d.bb
> > > b/meta/recipes-support/bdwgc/bdwgc_7.2d.bb
> > > > index 46e5257..d8e2de5 100644
> > > > --- a/meta/recipes-support/bdwgc/bdwgc_7.2d.bb
> > > > +++ b/meta/recipes-support/bdwgc/bdwgc_7.2d.bb
> > > > @@ -36,3 +36,12 @@ ARM_INSTRUCTION_SET = "arm"
> > > >
> > > > inherit autotools
> > > > BBCLASSEXTEND = "native nativesdk"
> > > > +
> > > > +do_configure_prepend() {
> > > > + # Without this, on older installations of
> > autoconf
> > > errors crop up during configure:
> > > > + # | configure.ac:70: error: possibly
> > undefined macro:
> > > AC_MSG_ERROR
> > > > + # | If this token and others are
> > legitimate,
> > > please use m4_pattern_allow.
> > > > + # | See the Autoconf documentation.
> > > > + # | configure.ac:358: error: possibly
> > undefined macro:
> > > AS_IF
> > > > + ( cd ${S}; autoreconf -i )
> > > > +}
> > >
> > >
> > > This is timely since we're seeing this issue on some
> > of the
> > > autobuilders. We should be autoreconfing by default
> > though,
> > > any idea why
> > > it doesn't in this case?
> > >
> > >
> > > No, I didn't actually dig into that, I didn't realize it
> > should be
> > > autoreconfing. Is it explciit in the do_configure step, or
> > implicit?
> > > Maybe it's a timestamp issue or something? The only
> > machine I've got
> > > left that has this problem is pretty fast, so maybe on a
> > slower (or
> > > more heavily loaded) machine an implicit rule will fire
> > where a beefy,
> > > unloaded one won't? Just a wild guess.
> >
> >
> > Reading the link you supplied further, it could be a missing
> > pkgconfig
> > dependency?
> >
> >
> > I thought so at first, but I couldn't find anything absent on my
> > builder that looked even remotely pkgconfig-related. Then I started
> > digging into the autotools stuff, since the warning is clearly about
> > expanding autoconf macros and that's when I finally started paying
> > attention to the version numbers on the failing host versus the
> > builders I use that weren't complaining.
> >
> >
> > It could still be that there's something missing, but when I noticed
> > the comment just below the "closed" bar in the issue I linked:
> >
> >
> > ivmai commented10 months ago
> > I have tested the git sources from bdwgc and they only configure
> > properly with autoconf >= 2.69. [...]
> > It seemed like I'd found at least confirmation that what I was seeing
> > was expected.
> >
> >
> > I have no idea why the autotools.bbclass' autoreconf wouldn't do it,
> > though. I'll go have a quick look to see if the tree is different
> > because I also passed it -i when I did the autoreconf.
> >
>
> I have a reproducer:
>
> bitbake bdwgc-native pkgconfig-native -c clean; bitbake bdwgc-native
>
> Pretty sure its a missing pkgconfig dependency.
>
Confirmed on the failing machine here too. You've got this, then? Or do
you want me to send a new patch?
--
Joe MacDonald
:wq
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20130619/3ad124de/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Openembedded-core
mailing list