Message ID | 1439516481-3375-1-git-send-email-nimaim@gmail.com |
---|---|
State | Changes Requested |
Headers | show |
Nimai, All, On 2015-08-13 21:41 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: > From: Nimai Mahajan <nimaim@gmail.com> > > Signed-off-by: Nimai Mahajan <nimaim@gmail.com> > --- > package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk | 2 +- > package/protobuf/protobuf.mk | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk b/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk > index d73eb25..ee4500e 100644 > --- a/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk > +++ b/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk > @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ > # > ################################################################################ > > -PROTOBUF_C_VERSION = v1.0.0-rc1 > +PROTOBUF_C_VERSION = v1.1.1 > PROTOBUF_C_SITE = $(call github,protobuf-c,protobuf-c,$(PROTOBUF_C_VERSION)) > PROTOBUF_C_DEPENDENCIES = host-protobuf-c > HOST_PROTOBUF_C_DEPENDENCIES = host-protobuf host-pkgconf > diff --git a/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk b/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk > index 0426fce..144e5fb 100644 > --- a/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk > +++ b/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk > @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ > # > ################################################################################ > > -PROTOBUF_VERSION = v2.5.0 > +PROTOBUF_VERSION = v2.6.1 Last time we tried to bump protobuf to v2.6.0, we got a lot of build failures, so the bump was reverted; http://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=7b6304af9d69d44ee3040c00b0670f19c02de7d2 http://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=61ae22810a8ca90d3b904d89eb3892c6cf92e87c Did you test under various conditions, such as: - static-only (2.5.0 currently fails in this case, I'm lookimng into it) - the various supported architectures: arm, i386, mipsel, x86_64 - with various C libraries: uClibc, musl, glibc If you did, then good! :-) Otherwise, I'd like this bump to at least be tested in the musl and static-only scenario (to see if that improves the situation...) Also, it seems v2.6.x adds proper support for PowerPC. Thanks! :-) Regards, Yann E. MORIN. > PROTOBUF_SITE = $(call github,google,protobuf,$(PROTOBUF_VERSION)) > PROTOBUF_LICENSE = BSD-3c > PROTOBUF_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING.txt > -- > 1.9.1 > > _______________________________________________ > buildroot mailing list > buildroot@busybox.net > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: > Nimai, All, > > On 2015-08-13 21:41 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: >> From: Nimai Mahajan <nimaim@gmail.com> >> >> Signed-off-by: Nimai Mahajan <nimaim@gmail.com> >> --- >> package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk | 2 +- >> package/protobuf/protobuf.mk | 2 +- >> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk b/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk >> index d73eb25..ee4500e 100644 >> --- a/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk >> +++ b/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk >> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ >> # >> ################################################################################ >> >> -PROTOBUF_C_VERSION = v1.0.0-rc1 >> +PROTOBUF_C_VERSION = v1.1.1 >> PROTOBUF_C_SITE = $(call github,protobuf-c,protobuf-c,$(PROTOBUF_C_VERSION)) >> PROTOBUF_C_DEPENDENCIES = host-protobuf-c >> HOST_PROTOBUF_C_DEPENDENCIES = host-protobuf host-pkgconf >> diff --git a/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk b/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk >> index 0426fce..144e5fb 100644 >> --- a/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk >> +++ b/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk >> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ >> # >> ################################################################################ >> >> -PROTOBUF_VERSION = v2.5.0 >> +PROTOBUF_VERSION = v2.6.1 > > Last time we tried to bump protobuf to v2.6.0, we got a lot of build > failures, so the bump was reverted; > http://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=7b6304af9d69d44ee3040c00b0670f19c02de7d2 > http://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=61ae22810a8ca90d3b904d89eb3892c6cf92e87c Sorry, I had no idea this was already tried to be pushed up ... I did try to search for this but gmane doesn't make that very easy. > > Did you test under various conditions, such as: > - static-only (2.5.0 currently fails in this case, I'm lookimng into it) > - the various supported architectures: arm, i386, mipsel, x86_64 > - with various C libraries: uClibc, musl, glibc > > If you did, then good! :-) Bah no I did not :-( I only tested with arm and i386 and glibc as I have toolchains for these both. I would love to set up an environment where I can test all these combinations more easily before pushing something up ... what would be your recommendation for doing that? > > Otherwise, I'd like this bump to at least be tested in the musl and > static-only scenario (to see if that improves the situation...) > > Also, it seems v2.6.x adds proper support for PowerPC. Yes, 2.6.1 also fixes a bunch of bugs (we use protocol buffers in production code and can attest to this) so I wanted to get it up there but needs a lot more testing with getting built with various configurations first. I can certainly at least try a musl static build with this. > > Thanks! :-) > > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > >> PROTOBUF_SITE = $(call github,google,protobuf,$(PROTOBUF_VERSION)) >> PROTOBUF_LICENSE = BSD-3c >> PROTOBUF_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING.txt >> -- >> 1.9.1 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> buildroot mailing list >> buildroot@busybox.net >> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot > > -- > .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. > | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | > | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | > | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | > | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | > '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
Nimai, All, On 2015-08-14 08:29 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: > > On 2015-08-13 21:41 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: [--SNIP--] > >> diff --git a/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk b/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk > >> index 0426fce..144e5fb 100644 > >> --- a/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk > >> +++ b/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk > >> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ > >> # > >> ################################################################################ > >> > >> -PROTOBUF_VERSION = v2.5.0 > >> +PROTOBUF_VERSION = v2.6.1 > > > > Last time we tried to bump protobuf to v2.6.0, we got a lot of build > > failures, so the bump was reverted; > > http://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=7b6304af9d69d44ee3040c00b0670f19c02de7d2 > > http://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=61ae22810a8ca90d3b904d89eb3892c6cf92e87c > > Sorry, I had no idea this was already tried to be pushed up ... I did > try to search for this but gmane doesn't make that very easy. No problem! I only knew about the revert because I was investigating the static build faiulures, and also considered the bump... ;-) > > Did you test under various conditions, such as: > > - static-only (2.5.0 currently fails in this case, I'm lookimng into it) > > - the various supported architectures: arm, i386, mipsel, x86_64 > > - with various C libraries: uClibc, musl, glibc > > > > If you did, then good! :-) > > Bah no I did not :-( I only tested with arm and i386 and glibc as I > have toolchains for these both. I would love to set up an environment > where I can test all these combinations more easily before pushing > something up ... what would be your recommendation for doing that? You can start with any of those defconfig: static based on uClibc: http://autobuild.buildroot.org/toolchains/configs/br-arm-full-static.config based on musl (but need to manually set static): http://autobuild.buildroot.org/toolchains/configs/br-arm-cortex-a9-musl.config Save them locally, and run: make BR2_DEFCONFIG=/path/to/where/you/saved/br-arm-full-static.config defconfig make menuconfig -- enable protobuf -- exit make protobuf (Similarly for the musl build, but you need to enable static-only in the menuconfig). > > Otherwise, I'd like this bump to at least be tested in the musl and > > static-only scenario (to see if that improves the situation...) > > > > Also, it seems v2.6.x adds proper support for PowerPC. > > Yes, 2.6.1 also fixes a bunch of bugs (we use protocol buffers in > production code and can attest to this) so I wanted to get it up there > but needs a lot more testing with getting built with various > configurations first. > > I can certainly at least try a musl static build with this. OK, great! Thanks! :-) Regards, Yann E. MORIN.
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: > Nimai, All, > > On 2015-08-14 08:29 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: >> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: >> > On 2015-08-13 21:41 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: > [--SNIP--] >> >> diff --git a/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk b/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk >> >> index 0426fce..144e5fb 100644 >> >> --- a/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk >> >> +++ b/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk >> >> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ >> >> # >> >> ################################################################################ >> >> >> >> -PROTOBUF_VERSION = v2.5.0 >> >> +PROTOBUF_VERSION = v2.6.1 >> > >> > Last time we tried to bump protobuf to v2.6.0, we got a lot of build >> > failures, so the bump was reverted; >> > http://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=7b6304af9d69d44ee3040c00b0670f19c02de7d2 >> > http://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=61ae22810a8ca90d3b904d89eb3892c6cf92e87c >> >> Sorry, I had no idea this was already tried to be pushed up ... I did >> try to search for this but gmane doesn't make that very easy. > > No problem! I only knew about the revert because I was investigating the > static build faiulures, and also considered the bump... ;-) > >> > Did you test under various conditions, such as: >> > - static-only (2.5.0 currently fails in this case, I'm lookimng into it) >> > - the various supported architectures: arm, i386, mipsel, x86_64 >> > - with various C libraries: uClibc, musl, glibc >> > >> > If you did, then good! :-) >> >> Bah no I did not :-( I only tested with arm and i386 and glibc as I >> have toolchains for these both. I would love to set up an environment >> where I can test all these combinations more easily before pushing >> something up ... what would be your recommendation for doing that? > > You can start with any of those defconfig: > > static based on uClibc: > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/toolchains/configs/br-arm-full-static.config > > based on musl (but need to manually set static): > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/toolchains/configs/br-arm-cortex-a9-musl.config > > Save them locally, and run: > > make BR2_DEFCONFIG=/path/to/where/you/saved/br-arm-full-static.config defconfig > make menuconfig > -- enable protobuf > -- exit > make protobuf > > (Similarly for the musl build, but you need to enable static-only in the > menuconfig). > Thanks for the suggestion! I didn't know autobuilder had prebuilt external toolchains for anyone to use publicly; sure saves loads of time :-) Just tested the toolchains you suggested (musl static and uClibc static) in addition to the ones I normally test (i386 + arm glibc shared libs) and these are the results: protobuf-c v1.1.1 builds successfully with all toolchains ... protobuf v2.6.1 builds successfully with everything except uClibc static, where it fails with this: D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Os -c google/protobuf/stubs/atomicops_internals_x86_gcc.cc -o google/protobuf/stubs/atomicops_internals_x86_gcc.o google/protobuf/stubs/common.cc:48:2: error: #error "No suitable threading library available." #error "No suitable threading library available." ^ /bin/bash ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile /home/nimai/Desktop/buildroot/buildroot/output/host/usr/bin/arm-linux-g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -pthread -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Woverloaded-virtual -Wno-sign-compare -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Os -static -static -c -o google/protobuf/stubs/stringprintf.lo google/protobuf/stubs/stringprintf.cc /bin/bash ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile /home/nimai/Desktop/buildroot/buildroot/output/host/usr/bin/arm-linux-g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -pthread -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Woverloaded-virtual -Wno-sign-compare -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Os -static -static -c -o google/protobuf/extension_set.lo google/protobuf/extension_set.cc /bin/bash ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile /home/nimai/Desktop/buildroot/buildroot/output/host/usr/bin/arm-linux-g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -pthread -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Woverloaded-virtual -Wno-sign-compare -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Os -static -static -c -o google/protobuf/generated_message_util.lo google/protobuf/generated_message_util.cc /bin/bash ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile /home/nimai/Desktop/buildroot/buildroot/output/host/usr/bin/arm-linux-g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -pthread -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Woverloaded-virtual -Wno-sign-compare -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Os -static -static -c -o google/protobuf/message_lite.lo google/protobuf/message_lite.cc libtool: compile: /home/nimai/Desktop/buildroot/buildroot/output/host/usr/bin/arm-linux-g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -pthread -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Woverloaded-virtual -Wno-sign-compare -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Os -c google/protobuf/stubs/stringprintf.cc -o google/protobuf/stubs/stringprintf.o libtool: compile: /home/nimai/Desktop/buildroot/buildroot/output/host/usr/bin/arm-linux-g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -pthread -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Woverloaded-virtual -Wno-sign-compare -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Os -c google/protobuf/extension_set.cc -o google/protobuf/extension_set.o make[4]: *** [google/protobuf/stubs/common.lo] Error 1 Seems to be a threading library issue but toolchain has NPTL thread support I believe so not sure why that is. >> > Otherwise, I'd like this bump to at least be tested in the musl and >> > static-only scenario (to see if that improves the situation...) >> > >> > Also, it seems v2.6.x adds proper support for PowerPC. >> >> Yes, 2.6.1 also fixes a bunch of bugs (we use protocol buffers in >> production code and can attest to this) so I wanted to get it up there >> but needs a lot more testing with getting built with various >> configurations first. >> >> I can certainly at least try a musl static build with this. > > OK, great! Thanks! :-) > > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > > -- > .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. > | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | > | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | > | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | > | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | > '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
Nimai, All, On 2015-08-14 11:11 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: [--SNIP--] > > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/toolchains/configs/br-arm-full-static.config > > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/toolchains/configs/br-arm-cortex-a9-musl.config [--SNIP--] > Thanks for the suggestion! I didn't know autobuilder had prebuilt > external toolchains for anyone to use publicly; Yes, it is a little-known fact. Even I often forgets about it from time to time... :-/ > protobuf-c v1.1.1 builds successfully with all toolchains ... Good. Please provide a separate patch just to bump protobuf-c, then. > protobuf v2.6.1 builds successfully with everything except uClibc > static, where it fails with this: > > D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Os -c > google/protobuf/stubs/atomicops_internals_x86_gcc.cc -o > google/protobuf/stubs/atomicops_internals_x86_gcc.o > google/protobuf/stubs/common.cc:48:2: error: #error "No suitable > threading library available." > #error "No suitable threading library available." > ^ [--SNIP--] > Seems to be a threading library issue but toolchain has NPTL thread > support I believe so not sure why that is. In fact, it is not a threading issue. If you look closely at the config.log, you'll see that pthreads are properly detected, but that a further check about shared libs is broken, see: http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/3ef/3efb86c7e8ec2db5d953d634470cafae79bd34cf/protobuf-v2.5.0/config.log Most notably: checking for the pthreads library -lpthreads... no checking whether pthreads work without any flags... no checking whether pthreads work with -Kthread... no checking whether pthreads work with -kthread... no checking for the pthreads library -llthread... no checking whether pthreads work with -pthread... yes checking for joinable pthread attribute... PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE checking if more special flags are required for pthreads... no checking whether to check for GCC pthread/shared inconsistencies... yes checking whether -pthread is sufficient with -shared... no checking whether -lpthread fixes that... no checking whether -lc_r fixes that... no configure: WARNING: Impossible to determine how to use pthreads with shared libraries checking whether what we have so far is sufficient with -nostdlib... no checking whether -lpthread saves the day... no configure: WARNING: Impossible to determine how to use pthreads with shared libraries and -nostdlib So, it's those checks about "GCC pthread/shared inconsistencies" that are broken: it forcibly tries a shared link, even thoug h we are asking for static link. It all happens in an m4 macro, in protobuf-v2.5.0/m4/acx_pthread.m4, around lines 239..375. Fixing this macros is a huge "enterntainment" ;-] So I think it is musch easier to just mark the package as not being availble for static-only builds... Regards, Yann E. MORIN.
On Aug 14, 2015 11:42 AM, "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: > > Nimai, All, > > On 2015-08-14 11:11 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: > [--SNIP--] > > > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/toolchains/configs/br-arm-full-static.config > > > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/toolchains/configs/br-arm-cortex-a9-musl.config > [--SNIP--] > > Thanks for the suggestion! I didn't know autobuilder had prebuilt > > external toolchains for anyone to use publicly; > > Yes, it is a little-known fact. Even I often forgets about it from time > to time... :-/ > > > protobuf-c v1.1.1 builds successfully with all toolchains ... > > Good. Please provide a separate patch just to bump protobuf-c, then. Yep, will do. > > > protobuf v2.6.1 builds successfully with everything except uClibc > > static, where it fails with this: > > > > D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Os -c > > google/protobuf/stubs/atomicops_internals_x86_gcc.cc -o > > google/protobuf/stubs/atomicops_internals_x86_gcc.o > > google/protobuf/stubs/common.cc:48:2: error: #error "No suitable > > threading library available." > > #error "No suitable threading library available." > > ^ > [--SNIP--] > > Seems to be a threading library issue but toolchain has NPTL thread > > support I believe so not sure why that is. > > In fact, it is not a threading issue. If you look closely at the > config.log, you'll see that pthreads are properly detected, but that a > further check about shared libs is broken, see: > > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/3ef/3efb86c7e8ec2db5d953d634470cafae79bd34cf/protobuf-v2.5.0/config.log > > Most notably: > > checking for the pthreads library -lpthreads... no > checking whether pthreads work without any flags... no > checking whether pthreads work with -Kthread... no > checking whether pthreads work with -kthread... no > checking for the pthreads library -llthread... no > checking whether pthreads work with -pthread... yes > checking for joinable pthread attribute... PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE > checking if more special flags are required for pthreads... no > checking whether to check for GCC pthread/shared inconsistencies... yes > checking whether -pthread is sufficient with -shared... no > checking whether -lpthread fixes that... no > checking whether -lc_r fixes that... no > configure: WARNING: Impossible to determine how to use pthreads with shared libraries > checking whether what we have so far is sufficient with -nostdlib... no > checking whether -lpthread saves the day... no > configure: WARNING: Impossible to determine how to use pthreads with shared libraries and -nostdlib > > So, it's those checks about "GCC pthread/shared inconsistencies" that > are broken: it forcibly tries a shared link, even thoug h we are asking > for static link. > > It all happens in an m4 macro, in protobuf-v2.5.0/m4/acx_pthread.m4, > around lines 239..375. Thanks for looking into it Yann. I see it now. So many broken autotools packages! Add this one to the list. > > Fixing this macros is a huge "enterntainment" ;-] > > So I think it is musch easier to just mark the package as not being > availble for static-only builds... Agreed ... will do. I appreciate the help. > > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > > -- > .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. > | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | > | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | > | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | > | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | > '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
Nimai, All, On 2015-08-14 11:54 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: > On Aug 14, 2015 11:42 AM, "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: > > On 2015-08-14 11:11 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: [--SNIP--] > > > protobuf-c v1.1.1 builds successfully with all toolchains ... > > Good. Please provide a separate patch just to bump protobuf-c, then. > Yep, will do. Thanks! :-) [--SNIP--] > > So I think it is musch easier to just mark the package as not being > > availble for static-only builds... > > Agreed ... will do. I appreciate the help. In this case, prepare two patches: - one to "fix" the static issue, that can be applied to master, - ont to do the bump, which can be applied to the -next branch. Beware when "fixing" that static issue: two packages do select BR2_PACKAGE_PROTOBUF (ola and mosh) so the new dependency must be propagated to those two packages as well. (In fact I already have the fix locally, but did not have time to submit it so far, so be my guest and submit it if you want! ;-) ) Regards, Yann E. MORIN.
Nimai, All, On 2015-08-14 18:45 +0200, Yann E. MORIN spake thusly: > On 2015-08-14 11:54 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: > > On Aug 14, 2015 11:42 AM, "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: > > > So I think it is musch easier to just mark the package as not being > > > availble for static-only builds... > > Agreed ... will do. I appreciate the help. > > In this case, prepare two patches: > - one to "fix" the static issue, that can be applied to master, [--SNIP--] > (In fact I already have the fix locally, but did not have time to submit > it so far, so be my guest and submit it if you want! ;-) ) So, I've now sent this patch: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/507628/ Regards, Yann E. MORIN.
On Aug 15, 2015 5:28 AM, "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: > > Nimai, All, > > On 2015-08-14 18:45 +0200, Yann E. MORIN spake thusly: > > On 2015-08-14 11:54 -0400, Nimai Mahajan spake thusly: > > > On Aug 14, 2015 11:42 AM, "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: > > > > So I think it is musch easier to just mark the package as not being > > > > availble for static-only builds... > > > Agreed ... will do. I appreciate the help. > > > > In this case, prepare two patches: > > - one to "fix" the static issue, that can be applied to master, > [--SNIP--] > > (In fact I already have the fix locally, but did not have time to submit > > it so far, so be my guest and submit it if you want! ;-) ) > > So, I've now sent this patch: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/507628/ > > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. Thank you very much Yann. I got tied up in some things and was going to take care of this next week but seems you best me to it :-) > > -- > .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. > | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | > | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | > | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | > | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | > '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
diff --git a/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk b/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk index d73eb25..ee4500e 100644 --- a/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk +++ b/package/protobuf-c/protobuf-c.mk @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ # ################################################################################ -PROTOBUF_C_VERSION = v1.0.0-rc1 +PROTOBUF_C_VERSION = v1.1.1 PROTOBUF_C_SITE = $(call github,protobuf-c,protobuf-c,$(PROTOBUF_C_VERSION)) PROTOBUF_C_DEPENDENCIES = host-protobuf-c HOST_PROTOBUF_C_DEPENDENCIES = host-protobuf host-pkgconf diff --git a/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk b/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk index 0426fce..144e5fb 100644 --- a/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk +++ b/package/protobuf/protobuf.mk @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ # ################################################################################ -PROTOBUF_VERSION = v2.5.0 +PROTOBUF_VERSION = v2.6.1 PROTOBUF_SITE = $(call github,google,protobuf,$(PROTOBUF_VERSION)) PROTOBUF_LICENSE = BSD-3c PROTOBUF_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING.txt