[oe] [2011.03-maintenance] unsatisfied dependencies to libgcc

[Tom Rini]

On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Steffen Sledz <sledz at dresearch-fe.de> wrote:
> Am 05.08.2011 09:13, schrieb Steffen Sledz:
>> On 04.08.2011 08:29, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>> In the last days we switched our local development from an older oe-dev master to 2011.03-maintenance branch and hit an annoying problem.
>>>
>>> The test builds on various developer machines were successful but the build on our continuous integration server (with exactly the same scripting) ended up with a lot of
>>>
>>> |  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following dependencies for lighttpd:
>>> |  *    libstdc++6 (>= 4.3.3) *         libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *    libgcc1 (>= 4.3.3) *
>>> |  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package lighttpd.
>>>
>>> errors.
>>>
>>> After some searching we found that there was no libgcc1_4.3.3-r24.2.6_armv5te.ipk in the deploy area.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure which package should produce this but i guess it should come from gcc-cross-4.3.3 (because its recipe version is r24.2.6 in opposite to gcc-4.3.3 r24.1.6).
>>>
>>> Looking into the log i hit the fact that the do_rootfs stage for the image was started *before* the do_package_stage of gcc-cross_4.3.3.bb was succeeded.
>>>
>>> Any ideas?
>>>
>>> PS: Bitbaking gcc-cross explicitly before bitbaking the image wors as a workaround for us at the moment.
>>
>> I made some research in this and there is something i do not understand.
>>
>> The task-depends.dot generated by bitbake -g (says
>>
>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" [label="console-image do_rootfs\n0:1.0-r0\n/home/sledz/work/angstrom-setup-scripts/sources/openembedded/recipes/images/console-image.bb"]
>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "lzo-native.do_populate_sysroot"
>>   "console-image.do_rootfs" -> "bluez4.do_populate_sysroot"
>>   ...
>>
>> So do_rootfs depends only on do_populate_sysroot stages. But the do_rootfs stage itself uses opkg to install the packages into the image.
>>
>> In my understanding this means that all the ipk files need to be available. But this is not guaranteed by the reported dependencies.
>>
>> A misunderstanding of mine? Or a bug?
>
> Ping!
>
> Did everyone read my message?
>
> If it really is a misunderstanding of mine, please let me know. But if i'm right this seems to be a critical problem.

It sounds both strange and a correct reading of the task lists, iirc.
Did we fix this in oe.dev perhaps and just need to pull a change over?

-- 
Tom