| Message ID | 20220426194618.218353-1-nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Commit | 1d5d5278ff4f620cd786b85e880e8429a04a1548 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | sanity: skip make 4.2.1 warning for debian | expand |
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 12:46 PM Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> wrote: > > This is a follow up patch of: > ad5829aa1f8a (sanity: Show a warning that make 4.2.1 is buggy on non-ubuntu systems) > > Debian10 has the exact same version/sources for make as Ubuntu > (focal), e.g. https://packages.debian.org/source/buster/make-dfsg and > https://packages.ubuntu.com/source/focal/make-dfsg. > > As per the corresponding changelog, the patch mentioned in > ad5829aa1f8a, is included in both Debian and Ubuntu in make > 4.2.1-1.1. So it's safe to use make 4.2.1 in Debian10. > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> > --- > meta/classes/sanity.bbclass | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > index c385d92e8b..c72a7b3ed3 100644 > --- a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > +++ b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ def check_make_version(sanity_data): > > if bb.utils.vercmp_string_op(version, "4.2.1", "=="): > distro = oe.lsb.distro_identifier() Not directly related to your change, but shouldn't this be lsb_distro_identifier() instead of oe.lsb.distro_identifier()? > - if "ubuntu" in distro: > + if "ubuntu" in distro or "debian" in distro: > return None > return "make version 4.2.1 is known to have issues on Centos/OpenSUSE and other non-Ubuntu systems. Please use a buildtools-make-tarball or a newer version of make.\n" > return None > -- > 2.36.0 > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > View/Reply Online (#164881): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/164881 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/90716488/3619030 > Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [armccurdy@gmail.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:51 PM Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 12:46 PM Nicolas Dechesne > <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > This is a follow up patch of: > > ad5829aa1f8a (sanity: Show a warning that make 4.2.1 is buggy on non-ubuntu systems) > > > > Debian10 has the exact same version/sources for make as Ubuntu > > (focal), e.g. https://packages.debian.org/source/buster/make-dfsg and > > https://packages.ubuntu.com/source/focal/make-dfsg. > > > > As per the corresponding changelog, the patch mentioned in > > ad5829aa1f8a, is included in both Debian and Ubuntu in make > > 4.2.1-1.1. So it's safe to use make 4.2.1 in Debian10. > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> > > --- > > meta/classes/sanity.bbclass | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > index c385d92e8b..c72a7b3ed3 100644 > > --- a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > +++ b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ def check_make_version(sanity_data): > > > > if bb.utils.vercmp_string_op(version, "4.2.1", "=="): > > distro = oe.lsb.distro_identifier() > > Not directly related to your change, but shouldn't this be > lsb_distro_identifier() instead of oe.lsb.distro_identifier()? > lsb_distro_identifier would work when it is inheriting base.bbclass otherwise the utility function is needed. > > - if "ubuntu" in distro: > > + if "ubuntu" in distro or "debian" in distro: > > return None > > return "make version 4.2.1 is known to have issues on Centos/OpenSUSE and other non-Ubuntu systems. Please use a buildtools-make-tarball or a newer version of make.\n" > > return None > > -- > > 2.36.0 > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > View/Reply Online (#164883): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/164883 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/90716488/1997914 > Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [raj.khem@gmail.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:56 PM Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:51 PM Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 12:46 PM Nicolas Dechesne > > <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > This is a follow up patch of: > > > ad5829aa1f8a (sanity: Show a warning that make 4.2.1 is buggy on non-ubuntu systems) > > > > > > Debian10 has the exact same version/sources for make as Ubuntu > > > (focal), e.g. https://packages.debian.org/source/buster/make-dfsg and > > > https://packages.ubuntu.com/source/focal/make-dfsg. > > > > > > As per the corresponding changelog, the patch mentioned in > > > ad5829aa1f8a, is included in both Debian and Ubuntu in make > > > 4.2.1-1.1. So it's safe to use make 4.2.1 in Debian10. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> > > > --- > > > meta/classes/sanity.bbclass | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > > index c385d92e8b..c72a7b3ed3 100644 > > > --- a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > > +++ b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > > @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ def check_make_version(sanity_data): > > > > > > if bb.utils.vercmp_string_op(version, "4.2.1", "=="): > > > distro = oe.lsb.distro_identifier() > > > > Not directly related to your change, but shouldn't this be > > lsb_distro_identifier() instead of oe.lsb.distro_identifier()? > > lsb_distro_identifier would work when it is inheriting base.bbclass > otherwise the utility function is needed. Question isn't really whether it will work or not (if it doesn't work, we should make it work) but rather whether any user-defined LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST should be applied before checking if the host distro is based on Debian/Ubuntu or not. > > > - if "ubuntu" in distro: > > > + if "ubuntu" in distro or "debian" in distro: > > > return None > > > return "make version 4.2.1 is known to have issues on Centos/OpenSUSE and other non-Ubuntu systems. Please use a buildtools-make-tarball or a newer version of make.\n" > > > return None > > > -- > > > 2.36.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > View/Reply Online (#164883): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/164883 > > Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/90716488/1997914 > > Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [raj.khem@gmail.com] > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > >
On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 14:39 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:56 PM Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:51 PM Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 12:46 PM Nicolas Dechesne > > > <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > This is a follow up patch of: > > > > ad5829aa1f8a (sanity: Show a warning that make 4.2.1 is buggy on non-ubuntu systems) > > > > > > > > Debian10 has the exact same version/sources for make as Ubuntu > > > > (focal), e.g. https://packages.debian.org/source/buster/make-dfsg and > > > > https://packages.ubuntu.com/source/focal/make-dfsg. > > > > > > > > As per the corresponding changelog, the patch mentioned in > > > > ad5829aa1f8a, is included in both Debian and Ubuntu in make > > > > 4.2.1-1.1. So it's safe to use make 4.2.1 in Debian10. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> > > > > --- > > > > meta/classes/sanity.bbclass | 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > > > index c385d92e8b..c72a7b3ed3 100644 > > > > --- a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > > > +++ b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > > > @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ def check_make_version(sanity_data): > > > > > > > > if bb.utils.vercmp_string_op(version, "4.2.1", "=="): > > > > distro = oe.lsb.distro_identifier() > > > > > > Not directly related to your change, but shouldn't this be > > > lsb_distro_identifier() instead of oe.lsb.distro_identifier()? > > > > lsb_distro_identifier would work when it is inheriting base.bbclass > > otherwise the utility function is needed. > > Question isn't really whether it will work or not (if it doesn't work, > we should make it work) but rather whether any user-defined > LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST should be applied before checking if the host distro > is based on Debian/Ubuntu or not. It would help to be a little more specific with the background. Having looked at the code, we have two lsb functions, one in base.bbclass and one in oe/lib/lsb.py. The one in base.bbclass is a wrapper which uses LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST. As far as I know, we don't use LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST in core at all. I suspect it should really probably be added to the lsb.py function in most cases. Is there any documentation or other info about when it should be applied and when it should not? I did have a look at https://git.yoctoproject.org/poky/commit/meta/classes/base.bbclass?id=096306ecd1bb80fe5e732584caca0172305628a2 where it was introduced 10 years ago but there isn't much more info. Chris: Do we still need/use this? As ever, patches are welcome both to improve this and perhaps to better document it too but if I remember rightly your policy is not to send them :/. Cheers, Richard
On Wednesday 27 April 2022 at 11:40:49 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > As far as I know, we don't use LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST in core at all. I suspect it > should really probably be added to the lsb.py function in most cases. Is there > any documentation or other info about when it should be applied and when it > should not? We used to use LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST to stop Debian minor release upgrades causing sstate paths to change up until about five years ago when we upgraded to an oe-core version that only considered the major version to be important. > I did have a look at > https://git.yoctoproject.org/poky/commit/meta/classes/base.bbclass?id=096306ecd1bb80fe5e732584caca0172305628a2 > where it was introduced 10 years ago but there isn't much more info. I believe that we use the mapping in SSTATE_MIRRORS to do the equivalent of what is described in that commit message: SSTATE_MIRRORS ?= "\ file://debian ${OUR_SSTATE_DIR}/debian-10 \n \ file://debian-11 ${OUR_SSTATE_DIR}/debian-10 \n \ file://debian-10 ${OUR_SSTATE_DIR}/debian-10 \n \ \ file://debian-9 ${OUR_SSTATE_DIR}/debian-9 \n \ file://.* ${OUR_SSTATE_DIR}/PATH \n \ " (Our autobuilders are running Debian 10 at the moment, so anyone running Debian 11 can make use of sstate files they wrote to debian-10, but anyone running Debian 9 cannot.) I have no idea whether this works for the Red Hat world though. HTH. Mike.
On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 3:40 AM Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 14:39 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:56 PM Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:51 PM Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 12:46 PM Nicolas Dechesne > > > > <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > This is a follow up patch of: > > > > > ad5829aa1f8a (sanity: Show a warning that make 4.2.1 is buggy on non-ubuntu systems) > > > > > > > > > > Debian10 has the exact same version/sources for make as Ubuntu > > > > > (focal), e.g. https://packages.debian.org/source/buster/make-dfsg and > > > > > https://packages.ubuntu.com/source/focal/make-dfsg. > > > > > > > > > > As per the corresponding changelog, the patch mentioned in > > > > > ad5829aa1f8a, is included in both Debian and Ubuntu in make > > > > > 4.2.1-1.1. So it's safe to use make 4.2.1 in Debian10. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> > > > > > --- > > > > > meta/classes/sanity.bbclass | 2 +- > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > > > > index c385d92e8b..c72a7b3ed3 100644 > > > > > --- a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > > > > +++ b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass > > > > > @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ def check_make_version(sanity_data): > > > > > > > > > > if bb.utils.vercmp_string_op(version, "4.2.1", "=="): > > > > > distro = oe.lsb.distro_identifier() > > > > > > > > Not directly related to your change, but shouldn't this be > > > > lsb_distro_identifier() instead of oe.lsb.distro_identifier()? > > > > > > lsb_distro_identifier would work when it is inheriting base.bbclass > > > otherwise the utility function is needed. > > > > Question isn't really whether it will work or not (if it doesn't work, > > we should make it work) but rather whether any user-defined > > LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST should be applied before checking if the host distro > > is based on Debian/Ubuntu or not. > > It would help to be a little more specific with the background. Having looked at > the code, we have two lsb functions, one in base.bbclass and one in > oe/lib/lsb.py. The one in base.bbclass is a wrapper which uses > LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST. > > As far as I know, we don't use LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST in core at all. I suspect it > should really probably be added to the lsb.py function in most cases. Is there > any documentation or other info about when it should be applied and when it > should not? Adding LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST directly to lsb.py would be fine I think. Personally I use LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST to map Linux Mint to Ubuntu. Linux Mint is binary compatible with Ubuntu (created from Ubuntu package feeds). The LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST mapping allows native sstate from a build server running Ubuntu to be reused on a developer laptop running Linux Mint. https://github.com/lgirdk/meta-mng/blob/ofw/conf/distro/include/mng-sstate.inc If the make 4.2.1 sanity check were to include LSB_DISTRO_ADJUST then (for me at least) it would suppress unnecessary warnings when running on Linux Mint (ie with the Ubuntu version of make). But in general, if we give users a method to adjust how their host distro is identified then we should enable it consistently unless there's a clear reason not to.
diff --git a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass index c385d92e8b..c72a7b3ed3 100644 --- a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass +++ b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ def check_make_version(sanity_data): if bb.utils.vercmp_string_op(version, "4.2.1", "=="): distro = oe.lsb.distro_identifier() - if "ubuntu" in distro: + if "ubuntu" in distro or "debian" in distro: return None return "make version 4.2.1 is known to have issues on Centos/OpenSUSE and other non-Ubuntu systems. Please use a buildtools-make-tarball or a newer version of make.\n" return None
This is a follow up patch of: ad5829aa1f8a (sanity: Show a warning that make 4.2.1 is buggy on non-ubuntu systems) Debian10 has the exact same version/sources for make as Ubuntu (focal), e.g. https://packages.debian.org/source/buster/make-dfsg and https://packages.ubuntu.com/source/focal/make-dfsg. As per the corresponding changelog, the patch mentioned in ad5829aa1f8a, is included in both Debian and Ubuntu in make 4.2.1-1.1. So it's safe to use make 4.2.1 in Debian10. Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> --- meta/classes/sanity.bbclass | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)