[oe] [PATCH] flex: disabled packaged staging of native builds

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/8/17 Jason Kridner <jkridner at beagleboard.org>:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Tom Rini <tom_rini at mentor.com> wrote:
>> Jason Kridner wrote:
>>>
>>> ---
>>>  recipes/flex/flex.inc |    4 +++-
>>>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/recipes/flex/flex.inc b/recipes/flex/flex.inc
>>> index 49b26e8..5d3f076 100644
>>> --- a/recipes/flex/flex.inc
>>> +++ b/recipes/flex/flex.inc
>>> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ LICENSE = "BSD"
>>>  DEPENDS = "gettext"
>>>  -INC_PR = "r5"
>>> +INC_PR = "r6"
>>>  S = "${WORKDIR}/flex-${PV}"
>>>  @@ -16,3 +16,5 @@ inherit autotools gettext
>>>  # static-only library; that might be an error
>>>  FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/libfl.a"
>>> +
>>> +PSTAGING_DISABLED_virtclass-native = "1"
>>
>> I assume you've ran into 2.3.35 not being relocation happy?  Have you been
>> able to look at this at all?  2.3.31 works so it's something 'bad' done
>> upstream.  Thanks!
>
> I did, but I didn't look into the details.  bison-native wouldn't
> rebuild when I used my flex-native pstage.  bitbake -c clean
> flex-native fixed it, so...

After that would rebuilding from pstage cause the error again?
I'm a little bit worried that we inhibit PSTAGING because e.g.
something else is wrong (e.g. a change elsewhere that should have been
resulted in a flex PR bump).

Besides (but this is more a global remark): it would be nice if a
recipe disables something that there is a short description why this
is done. (at least in the commit message, but imho preferably in the
recipe, so in half a year time, people still know why it is done and
can much easier judge if it can be removed).

Frans.