| Message ID | f11c64ea4d0c98e4022fcb479e1eaea380662a1b.1715771298.git.jan.kiszka@siemens.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | More kbuild improvements, single-build source packages, cross profile fix | expand |
Kiszka, Jan (T CED), Mittwoch, 15. Mai 2024 13:08: > ISAR_CROSS_COMPILE might be set even if we are not cross-building a > package. Use an output of crossbuild.bbclass, BUILD_ARCH, to find out > if we are actually cross-building a package. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com> > --- > meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass b/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass > index 30caedf9..93321976 100644 > --- a/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass > +++ b/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass > @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ dpkg_runbuild() { > > def isar_deb_build_profiles(d): > deb_build_profiles = d.getVar('DEB_BUILD_PROFILES') > - if bb.utils.to_boolean(d.getVar('ISAR_CROSS_COMPILE')): > + if d.getVar('BUILD_ARCH') != d.getVar('DISTRO_ARCH'): That's the question "are we _actually_ cross-compiling"? Elsewhere (multiarch.bbclass, linux-custom.inc) we have that check implemented as "ISAR_CROSS_COMPILE && DISTRO_ARCH != HOST_ARCH". As a follow-up we should look into unifying this. Maybe have crossvars.bbclass figure out how we're building, and set one variable to be consumed by recipes, e.g. ISAR_BUILDPROFILE="native|emulated|cross" Or even add an override (:buildprofile-native, ...) to make it easier to use? Adriaan > deb_build_profiles += ' cross' > return deb_build_profiles.strip() > > -- > 2.35.3
On 16.05.24 08:06, Schmidt, Adriaan (T CED EDC-DE) wrote: > Kiszka, Jan (T CED), Mittwoch, 15. Mai 2024 13:08: >> ISAR_CROSS_COMPILE might be set even if we are not cross-building a >> package. Use an output of crossbuild.bbclass, BUILD_ARCH, to find out >> if we are actually cross-building a package. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com> >> --- >> meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass b/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass >> index 30caedf9..93321976 100644 >> --- a/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass >> +++ b/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass >> @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ dpkg_runbuild() { >> >> def isar_deb_build_profiles(d): >> deb_build_profiles = d.getVar('DEB_BUILD_PROFILES') >> - if bb.utils.to_boolean(d.getVar('ISAR_CROSS_COMPILE')): >> + if d.getVar('BUILD_ARCH') != d.getVar('DISTRO_ARCH'): > > That's the question "are we _actually_ cross-compiling"? > > Elsewhere (multiarch.bbclass, linux-custom.inc) we have that > check implemented as "ISAR_CROSS_COMPILE && DISTRO_ARCH != HOST_ARCH". > > As a follow-up we should look into unifying this. > Maybe have crossvars.bbclass figure out how we're building, and set > one variable to be consumed by recipes, e.g. > > ISAR_BUILDPROFILE="native|emulated|cross" > > Or even add an override (:buildprofile-native, ...) to make it easier to use? > I don't disagree. Jan
diff --git a/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass b/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass index 30caedf9..93321976 100644 --- a/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass +++ b/meta/classes/dpkg-base.bbclass @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ dpkg_runbuild() { def isar_deb_build_profiles(d): deb_build_profiles = d.getVar('DEB_BUILD_PROFILES') - if bb.utils.to_boolean(d.getVar('ISAR_CROSS_COMPILE')): + if d.getVar('BUILD_ARCH') != d.getVar('DISTRO_ARCH'): deb_build_profiles += ' cross' return deb_build_profiles.strip()