[meta-freescale] Junk install script created upon bitbake meta-toolchain

[Umar Qureshey]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: otavio.salvador at gmail.com [mailto:otavio.salvador at gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of Otavio Salvador
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 2:24 PM
> To: Umar Qureshey
> Cc: Daiane Angolini; meta-freescale at yoctoproject.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] Junk install script created upon bitbake meta-
> toolchain
> 
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Umar Qureshey <umar at janteq.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Umar Qureshey <umar at janteq.com>
> wrote:
> >> ...
> >> > Wow, the binary is embedded inside the script.  Because creating a
> >> separate file is just so much trouble.
> >>
> >> This is done this way as it is relocatable; we used to build a
> >> tarball file but it does not allow you to choose where to install it
> >> and the script allow it to solve this problem. It is a very user
> >> friendly way to install a toolchain. It should have been made executable
> indeed.
> >
> > Ok, thank you for clarifying.
> >
> > I'm noticing issues arising with Fedora.  I posted previously about how Qt
> image won't build on Fedora.  If I had a virtual machine I'd switch to Ubuntu
> but switching my real metal development box from Fedora to Ubuntu is
> something I'd rather not do.
> 
> I didn't see the message about the failure; can you point me to the message?

I'm sorry I may have been confused about which failure you were referring to.  I thought you were talking about the Qt.  But in case you were talking about this issue, when I source this script I get:

bash: source: ./poky-eglibc-x86_64-arm-toolchain-1.4.2.sh: cannot execute binary file

HTH.