|
Re: [PATCH] umoci: rework recipe
On 7/2/21 3:59 PM, hongxu wrote:
Hi Bruce,
About native umoci, I've no idea about the patchelf testing, I directly run native umoci -h in my build
...
On 7/2/21 3:59 PM, hongxu wrote:
Hi Bruce,
About native umoci, I've no idea about the patchelf testing, I directly run native umoci -h in my build
...
|
By
hongxu
·
#6602
·
|
|
[PATCH] umoci: rework recipe
1. tweak homepage
2. Use go_do_compile of go bbclass in oe-core to replace
the do_compile in recipe, variables such as LD,CC,
CFLAGS, CGO_CFLAGS will be set automatically
3. Use go_do_install
1. tweak homepage
2. Use go_do_compile of go bbclass in oe-core to replace
the do_compile in recipe, variables such as LD,CC,
CFLAGS, CGO_CFLAGS will be set automatically
3. Use go_do_install
|
By
hongxu
·
#6601
·
|
|
[PATCH 3/3] xtf: fix build with gcc11 SRCREV and specifying linker
Newer XTF revision works around GCC 11.1 issue 99578 and
supplying the correct linker to use fixes the build.
Signed-off-by: Christopher Clark <christopher.w.clark@...>
---
Newer XTF revision works around GCC 11.1 issue 99578 and
supplying the correct linker to use fixes the build.
Signed-off-by: Christopher Clark <christopher.w.clark@...>
---
|
By
Christopher Clark
·
#6600
·
|
|
[PATCH 2/3] xen, xen-tools: fix build and passing of CFLAGS via Xen vars
Ensure that the Xen build system variables EXTRA_CFLAGS_XEN_CORE and
EXTRA_CFLAGS_XEN_TOOLS are passed into the compile steps.
Update the hypervisor compilation to avoid passing in most compile
Ensure that the Xen build system variables EXTRA_CFLAGS_XEN_CORE and
EXTRA_CFLAGS_XEN_TOOLS are passed into the compile steps.
Update the hypervisor compilation to avoid passing in most compile
|
By
Christopher Clark
·
#6599
·
|
|
[PATCH 1/3] xen, xen-tools: add upstream patches for gcc11 compilation fixes
This allows the -Wno-vla-parameter workaround that was previously
applied (e99974aa57) to be retired.
Signed-off-by: Christopher Clark <christopher.w.clark@...>
---
This allows the -Wno-vla-parameter workaround that was previously
applied (e99974aa57) to be retired.
Signed-off-by: Christopher Clark <christopher.w.clark@...>
---
|
By
Christopher Clark
·
#6598
·
|
|
[PATCH 0/3] Xen and XTF build fixes series
Pull in updates from upstream Xen and XTF for GCC 11 and fix passing
compiler flags for the Xen hypervisor, tools and test framework.
Build and boot tested for both Arm64 and
Pull in updates from upstream Xen and XTF for GCC 11 and fix passing
compiler flags for the Xen hypervisor, tools and test framework.
Build and boot tested for both Arm64 and
|
By
Christopher Clark
·
#6597
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/2] dev86: work on all hosts, other cleanups
merged.
Bruce
--
- Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
thee at its end
- "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II
merged.
Bruce
--
- Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
thee at its end
- "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II
|
By
Bruce Ashfield
·
#6596
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
<richard.purdie@...> wrote:
That would be preferable on my end, since these recipes that depend on
seccomp unconditionally, are also incompatible with that same set of
hosts (I state
<richard.purdie@...> wrote:
That would be preferable on my end, since these recipes that depend on
seccomp unconditionally, are also incompatible with that same set of
hosts (I state
|
By
Bruce Ashfield
·
#6595
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
The reason for the distro_feature is to have a way to configure multiple
packageconfigs on/off centrally. Some platforms don't support seccomp
at all (riscv/arc) so forcing it on everywhere isn't
The reason for the distro_feature is to have a way to configure multiple
packageconfigs on/off centrally. Some platforms don't support seccomp
at all (riscv/arc) so forcing it on everywhere isn't
|
By
Richard Purdie
·
#6594
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bruce Ashfield via
lists.yoctoproject.org
<bruce.ashfield=gmail.com@...> wrote:
I still don't have a better solution to this, and while I see
On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bruce Ashfield via
lists.yoctoproject.org
<bruce.ashfield=gmail.com@...> wrote:
I still don't have a better solution to this, and while I see
|
By
Bruce Ashfield
·
#6593
·
|
|
[PATCH 2/2] dev86: don't require dev86-native to build dev86
Instead of installing binaries and patching the makefiles to run external=
commands, simply
build ifdef using BUILD_CC instead of CC.
This patch is now upstreamable, the recipe is less complicated,
Instead of installing binaries and patching the makefiles to run external=
commands, simply
build ifdef using BUILD_CC instead of CC.
This patch is now upstreamable, the recipe is less complicated,
|
By
Ross Burton <ross@...>
·
#6592
·
|
|
[PATCH 1/2] dev86: work on all hosts, other cleanups
Remove COMPATIBLE_HOST, whilst this is an x86 assembler there's nothing t=
o stop
you building it on or for arm64 and assembling x86 code.
Override INEXE so that binaries are not stripped and remove
Remove COMPATIBLE_HOST, whilst this is an x86 assembler there's nothing t=
o stop
you building it on or for arm64 and assembling x86 code.
Override INEXE so that binaries are not stripped and remove
|
By
Ross Burton <ross@...>
·
#6591
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 11:18 AM Bruce Ashfield via
lists.yoctoproject.org
<bruce.ashfield=gmail.com@...> wrote:
And for clarity, I realize that the systemd recipe checks for
On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 11:18 AM Bruce Ashfield via
lists.yoctoproject.org
<bruce.ashfield=gmail.com@...> wrote:
And for clarity, I realize that the systemd recipe checks for
|
By
Bruce Ashfield
·
#6590
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
Yes .. exactly :D
That is the core of what I was asking. A package that is now in core,
why is it only enabled by a distro feature ?
That is causing the proliferation of checks in meta-virt (and
Yes .. exactly :D
That is the core of what I was asking. A package that is now in core,
why is it only enabled by a distro feature ?
That is causing the proliferation of checks in meta-virt (and
|
By
Bruce Ashfield
·
#6589
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
I was getting the following when passing `--machinesmymachine`:
```
ERROR: Nothing PROVIDES 'libseccomp' (but meta-virtualization/recipes-containers/podman/podman_git.bb,
I was getting the following when passing `--machinesmymachine`:
```
ERROR: Nothing PROVIDES 'libseccomp' (but meta-virtualization/recipes-containers/podman/podman_git.bb,
|
By
Diego Sueiro
·
#6588
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
AB would use the new default DISTRO_FEATURES which already contain seccomp.
AB would use the new default DISTRO_FEATURES which already contain seccomp.
|
By
Martin Jansa
·
#6587
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/121/builds/110
Says green...
Obviously we just tweak the css :)
Cheers,
Richard
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/121/builds/110
Says green...
Obviously we just tweak the css :)
Cheers,
Richard
|
By
Richard Purdie
·
#6586
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
I've disagreed with check-layer before (and we've changed how it works)
That being said, the layer is checked on the AB, and Richard hasn't
reported any issues. So clearly there's something wrong
I've disagreed with check-layer before (and we've changed how it works)
That being said, the layer is checked on the AB, and Richard hasn't
reported any issues. So clearly there's something wrong
|
By
Bruce Ashfield
·
#6585
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
By
Diego Sueiro
·
#6584
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH 1/3] podman: Add seccomp as REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES
Right, I understand how/why it works like this .. but it is super
clunky when we can't just depend on something that is now in core,
without needing to sprinkle distro checks everywhere.
As the list
Right, I understand how/why it works like this .. but it is super
clunky when we can't just depend on something that is now in core,
without needing to sprinkle distro checks everywhere.
As the list
|
By
Bruce Ashfield
·
#6583
·
|