On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 12:01 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:

On 07/12/2011 11:51 AM, Joshua Lock wrote:

In our technical team call today we spent some time discussing how to
support distribution releases that are due to happen around the time of
Yocto 1.1.

Yocto 1.1 is scheduled for release on October 6th[1], the same month in
which both Ubuntu and Fedora have new releases planned[2,3].
OpenSUSE doesn't have a release scheduled until November 10th[4].

We should accommodate for these releases in our planning around 1.1 as
we need to ensure that Yocto 1.1 can be used on the new versions of the
chosen supported distros.

I had initially suggested we have people doing test and any relevant
development around the beta cycles of Ubuntu and Fedora:

Fedora Beta (2011-09-20)
Ubuntu (2011-09-01)
In this time frame OpenSUSE will be on Milestone 5 (2011-09-01) which
afaict (based on the 6th milestone being followed by an RC) should
roughly equate to a beta.

However this aligns with our RC period at which point we may not want to
accept large patches?

To meet our stabilise complete goal of August 29th we'd have to have
people testing with:
Fedora Alpha (2011-08-16)
Ubuntu Alpha 3 (2011-08-04)
OpenSUSE Milestone 4 (2011-08-11)

What are peoples thoughts on this?

At the very least a sanity test to know which sorts of issues we'll hit
with these would be valuable. However, I believe our policy is N-1, and
not N+1,N,N-1, so supporting not-yet released versions isn't something I
think we should spend too much time on. Minor fixes to support these
post release seem like good candidates for a point release.

Much as I'd like to agree with you, traditionally this does tend to bite
us hard. The fixes some of the releases have needed are sometimes not so
minor too :(.

The reason is that we have a community with a significant portion of
people who do stay close to the edge as far as distros go. They'll take
latest releases and expect Yocto to work on them even if the releases
come out at the same time. Its not often realised how far in advance
trees get frozen for stabilisation.

So summary is I'm in favour of trying to identify problems early and
then doing what we can to address them...

As such, this time around I'll update my build machine to latest Ubuntu
at the beginning of August....

Cheers,

Richard

_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@...
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 09:15 +0800, NiQingliang wrote:

I think Archlinux is the preferred choice.-_-
Just joke.

I doubt why the bitbake need python2.x but just use /bin/env python. I
think If it need a specific version python, it should write it in the
shebang. e.g. /bin/env python2.6

I looked at this but not enough of the distributions we care to support
have a python2.6 binary:

joshual@scimitar:~
$ /usr/bin/env python2
Python 2.7.1 (r271:86832, Apr 12 2011, 16:16:18)
[GCC 4.6.0 20110331 (Red Hat 4.6.0-2)] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.

joshual@scimitar:~
$ /usr/bin/env python2.6
/usr/bin/env: python2.6: No such file or directory

I'd love to support Arch more thoroughly but they aren't making it easy
for us ;-)

Cheers,
Joshua
--
Joshua Lock
Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@...
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 10:19 +0800, NiQingliang wrote:

/usr/bin/env python2
/usr/bin/env python2.7

These are both valid on Fedora 15, iirc before distributions started
shipping Python 3 they were less common though...

both of them are ok for archlinux, but I don't know which is ok for
other distributions, maybe both are not.

maybe we can make a shell script to detect the python version, and make
a symbollink to the right one in some directory, and add the directory
into env var "PATH".

Patches welcome :-)

I looked at it briefly and the work would require more time than I have
spare right now just to ensure it worked on all required distributions.

If you'd like to work on a patch I'd be happy to help test and review.

Cheers,
Joshua
--
Joshua Lock
Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 10:19 +0800, NiQingliang wrote:

/usr/bin/env python2
/usr/bin/env python2.7

These are both valid on Fedora 15, iirc before distributions started
shipping Python 3 they were less common though...

both of them are ok for archlinux, but I don't know which is ok for
other distributions, maybe both are not.

maybe we can make a shell script to detect the python version, and make
a symbollink to the right one in some directory, and add the directory
into env var "PATH".

Patches welcome :-)

I looked at it briefly and the work would require more time than I have
spare right now just to ensure it worked on all required distributions.

If you'd like to work on a patch I'd be happy to help test and review.

Cheers,
Joshua
--
Joshua Lock
Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

On 07/13/2011 01:04 AM, NiQingliang wrote:

first sorry about that, indeed I don't know how to commit a patch, so
just paste the diff result here.

diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
index 77332a7..0da8bc0 100755
--- a/oe-init-build-env
+++ b/oe-init-build-env
@@ -39,6 +39,20 @@ else
$OEROOT/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
unset OEROOT
unset BBPATH
+

Before searching manually, we should attempt to use whatever is set in
the environment.

--
Darren

+ # find the python version 2.x
+ # the 'python -V' need redirect to stdout
+ # precondition:
+ # $BUILDDIR is not NULL, but I doubt when it will be NULL.
+ # user have not made the file $BUILDDIR/python by himself.
+ for PY_BIN in `find /{usr/,}bin -regex '.*/python\(\|2\|2\.[0-9]*
\)'`; do
+ if [ -n "`$PY_BIN -V 2>&1|grep '^Python 2\.'`" ]; then
+ ln -sf $PY_BIN $BUILDDIR/python
+ export PATH="$BUILDDIR:$PATH"
+ break
+ fi
+ done
+
[ -n "$BUILDDIR" ] && cd $BUILDDIR
fi


On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 10:31 +0800, Joshua Lock wrote:

On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 10:19 +0800, NiQingliang wrote:

/usr/bin/env python2
/usr/bin/env python2.7

These are both valid on Fedora 15, iirc before distributions started
shipping Python 3 they were less common though...

both of them are ok for archlinux, but I don't know which is ok for
other distributions, maybe both are not.

maybe we can make a shell script to detect the python version, and make
a symbollink to the right one in some directory, and add the directory
into env var "PATH".

Patches welcome :-)

I looked at it briefly and the work would require more time than I have
spare right now just to ensure it worked on all required distributions.

If you'd like to work on a patch I'd be happy to help test and review.

Cheers,
Joshua
--
Joshua Lock
Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel

On 07/13/2011 01:04 AM, NiQingliang wrote:

first sorry about that, indeed I don't know how to commit a patch, so
just paste the diff result here.

diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
index 77332a7..0da8bc0 100755
--- a/oe-init-build-env
+++ b/oe-init-build-env
@@ -39,6 +39,20 @@ else
$OEROOT/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
unset OEROOT
unset BBPATH
+

Before searching manually, we should attempt to use whatever is set in
the environment.

--
Darren

+ # find the python version 2.x
+ # the 'python -V' need redirect to stdout
+ # precondition:
+ # $BUILDDIR is not NULL, but I doubt when it will be NULL.
+ # user have not made the file $BUILDDIR/python by himself.
+ for PY_BIN in `find /{usr/,}bin -regex '.*/python\(\|2\|2\.[0-9]*
\)'`; do
+ if [ -n "`$PY_BIN -V 2>&1|grep '^Python 2\.'`" ]; then
+ ln -sf $PY_BIN $BUILDDIR/python
+ export PATH="$BUILDDIR:$PATH"
+ break
+ fi
+ done
+
[ -n "$BUILDDIR" ] && cd $BUILDDIR
fi


On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 10:31 +0800, Joshua Lock wrote:

On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 10:19 +0800, NiQingliang wrote:

/usr/bin/env python2
/usr/bin/env python2.7

These are both valid on Fedora 15, iirc before distributions started
shipping Python 3 they were less common though...

both of them are ok for archlinux, but I don't know which is ok for
other distributions, maybe both are not.

maybe we can make a shell script to detect the python version, and make
a symbollink to the right one in some directory, and add the directory
into env var "PATH".

Patches welcome :-)

I looked at it briefly and the work would require more time than I have
spare right now just to ensure it worked on all required distributions.

If you'd like to work on a patch I'd be happy to help test and review.

Cheers,
Joshua
--
Joshua Lock
Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel

On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 09:34 +0800, NiQingliang wrote:

new version

diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
index 77332a7..0fe1b5e 100755
--- a/oe-init-build-env
+++ b/oe-init-build-env
@@ -39,6 +39,35 @@ else
$OEROOT/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
unset OEROOT
unset BBPATH
+
+ # find the python 2.x, if the default python is not.
+ # NOTE:
+ # the 'python -V' need redirect to stdout
+ # once we can ensure every distribution has 'python2' (currently,
except
+ # ubuntu), we should change bitbake's shebang to '/usr/bin/env
python2',
+ # and remove this patch.
+ # precondition:
+ # $BUILDDIR is not NULL, but I doubt when it will be NULL.
+ # user have not made the file $BUILDDIR/python by himself.
+ if [ -z "`/usr/bin/env python -V 2>&1|grep '^Python 2\.'`" ]; then
+ echo "WARNING: your default python is not 2.x, so autodetect..."

I'm not sure we need to print this.

+ PYTHON2_BIN=""
+ for PY_BIN in `find /{usr/,}bin -regex '.*/python\(\|2\|2\.[0-9]*
\)'`; do
+ if [ -n "`$PY_BIN -V 2>&1|grep '^Python 2\.'`" ]; then
+ PYTHON2_BIN=$PY_BIN
+ break
+ fi
+ done
+ if [ -n "$PYTHON2_BIN" ]; then
+ ln -sf $PY_BIN $BUILDDIR/python
+ export PATH="$BUILDDIR:$PATH"
+ echo "WARNING: poky will use '$PY_BIN' to execute python
code."

I can live without this message but if we do leave it in we should
probably call it a NOTE rather than WARNING.

+ else
+ echo "ERROR: poky can't find python 2.x."

Perhaps make this a little more informative?

ERROR: unable to find Python 2.x, BitBake requires Python 2.6 or 2.7.

+ fi
+ unset PYTHON2_BIN
+ fi
+
[ -n "$BUILDDIR" ] && cd $BUILDDIR
fi

I can verify that this works as expected (i.e. does nothing) on my
Fedora 15 machine with Python 2.7.1.

Could you submit the patch to the openembedded-core mailing list so that
it can be considered for inclusion in the Yocto project's shared
upstream?

Thanks,
Joshua
--
Joshua Lock
Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

update accroding your suggestion.
This patch is for bitbake indeed, but bitbake is not part of
openembedded. Is it RIGHT?


diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
index 77332a7..acf4e96 100755
--- a/oe-init-build-env
+++ b/oe-init-build-env
@@ -39,6 +39,34 @@ else
$OEROOT/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
unset OEROOT
unset BBPATH
+
+ # find the python 2.x, if the default python is not.
+ # NOTE:
+ # the 'python -V' need redirect to stdout
+ # once we can ensure every distribution has 'python2' (currently,
except
+ # ubuntu), we should change bitbake's shebang to '/usr/bin/env
python2',
+ # and remove this patch.
+ # precondition:
+ # $BUILDDIR is not NULL, but I doubt when it will be NULL.
+ # user have not made the file $BUILDDIR/python by himself.
+ if [ -z "`/usr/bin/env python -V 2>&1|grep '^Python 2\.'`" ]; then
+ PYTHON2_BIN=""
+ for PY_BIN in `find /{usr/,}bin -regex '.*/python\(\|2\|2\.[0-9]*
\)'`; do
+ if [ -n "`$PY_BIN -V 2>&1|grep '^Python 2\.'`" ]; then
+ PYTHON2_BIN=$PY_BIN
+ break
+ fi
+ done
+ if [ -n "$PYTHON2_BIN" ]; then
+ ln -sf $PY_BIN $BUILDDIR/python
+ export PATH="$BUILDDIR:$PATH"
+ echo "NOTE: poky will use '$PY_BIN' to execute python code."
+ else
+ echo "ERROR: unable to find Python 2.x, BitBake requires
Python 2.6 or
+ fi
+ unset PYTHON2_BIN
+ fi
+
[ -n "$BUILDDIR" ] && cd $BUILDDIR
fi


On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 09:13 +0800, Joshua Lock wrote:

On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 09:34 +0800, NiQingliang wrote:

new version

diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
index 77332a7..0fe1b5e 100755
--- a/oe-init-build-env
+++ b/oe-init-build-env
@@ -39,6 +39,35 @@ else
$OEROOT/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
unset OEROOT
unset BBPATH
+
+ # find the python 2.x, if the default python is not.
+ # NOTE:
+ # the 'python -V' need redirect to stdout
+ # once we can ensure every distribution has 'python2' (currently,
except
+ # ubuntu), we should change bitbake's shebang to '/usr/bin/env
python2',
+ # and remove this patch.
+ # precondition:
+ # $BUILDDIR is not NULL, but I doubt when it will be NULL.
+ # user have not made the file $BUILDDIR/python by himself.
+ if [ -z "`/usr/bin/env python -V 2>&1|grep '^Python 2\.'`" ]; then
+ echo "WARNING: your default python is not 2.x, so autodetect..."

I'm not sure we need to print this.

+ PYTHON2_BIN=""
+ for PY_BIN in `find /{usr/,}bin -regex '.*/python\(\|2\|2\.[0-9]*
\)'`; do
+ if [ -n "`$PY_BIN -V 2>&1|grep '^Python 2\.'`" ]; then
+ PYTHON2_BIN=$PY_BIN
+ break
+ fi
+ done
+ if [ -n "$PYTHON2_BIN" ]; then
+ ln -sf $PY_BIN $BUILDDIR/python
+ export PATH="$BUILDDIR:$PATH"
+ echo "WARNING: poky will use '$PY_BIN' to execute python
code."

I can live without this message but if we do leave it in we should
probably call it a NOTE rather than WARNING.

+ else
+ echo "ERROR: poky can't find python 2.x."

Perhaps make this a little more informative?

ERROR: unable to find Python 2.x, BitBake requires Python 2.6 or 2.7.

+ fi
+ unset PYTHON2_BIN
+ fi
+
[ -n "$BUILDDIR" ] && cd $BUILDDIR
fi

I can verify that this works as expected (i.e. does nothing) on my
Fedora 15 machine with Python 2.7.1.

Could you submit the patch to the openembedded-core mailing list so that
it can be considered for inclusion in the Yocto project's shared
upstream?

Thanks,
Joshua
--
Joshua Lock
Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

--
倪庆亮
TEL: 13588371863
E-MAIL: niqingliang@...
BLOG: http://niqingliang2003.wordpress.com


_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@...
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto