[Yocto-builds] buildbot failure in Yocto on crownbay

[Scott Garman]

On 06/04/2012 08:58 PM, Tom Zanussi wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 20:27 -0700, Scott Garman wrote:
>> On 06/04/2012 01:28 PM, Tom Zanussi wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 09:17 -0700, Scott Garman wrote:
>>>> On 06/01/2012 09:12 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>>>>> On Friday 01 June 2012 00:09:13 elizabeth.flanagan at intel.com wrote:
>>>>>> Build status: FAILURE
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Buildslave for this Build: ab09
>>>>>> Complete logs for all build steps:
>>>>>> http://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org:8010/builders/crownbay/builds/134 Build
>>>>>> Reason: Triggerable(crownbay)
>>>>>> Build Source Stamp: [branch denzil] 7552ccd06c6327b5f36ee0cceb432946f8e98d3f
>>>>>
>>>>> | error: Failed dependencies:
>>>>> | 	libusb-0.1-4>= 0.1.3 is needed by gnupg-2.0.18-r1.core2
>>>>> NOTE: package core-image-sato-sdk-1.0-r0: task do_rootfs: Failed
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure what is going on here but we seem to be getting this a lot with the
>>>>> denzil builds. Scott, any ideas?
>>>>
>>>> I'm planning to run some builds over the weekend, and I'll make sure
>>>> core-image-sato-sdk is one of them.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Were you able to see anything?
>>>
>>> I was unable to reproduce this here, but it seems to be blocking all the
>>> meta-intel BSPs on autobuilder...
>>
>> I haven't been able to reproduce it building core-image-sato for crownbay.
>>
>> However, I have the feeling this is the rpm ordering bug that bit us for
>> the useradd packages that rely on shadow utils and friends being installed.
>>
>
> Is there a workaround for that?
>
> It seems only the autobuilder is seeing this problem, and everyone else
> doing their own (from-scratch?) builds is able to get a good build...
>
> Considering that all we need at this point are images for QA to test, is
> there something that can be done on autobuilder to get past this and get
> some images built?
>
> One thing I noticed is that gnupg depends on libusb, but gnupg doesn't
> have libusb in its DEPENDS.  I don't know if thats the source of the
> problem, but shouldn't it regardless?
>
> Beth, can you try the following patch on one of the failing builds and
> see if it helps?

I'm not at all clear why gnupng would depend on libusb? Do you know?

That said, it's definitely not in the dependency list, so if it's 
needed, we do need to add it.

Scott

-- 
Scott Garman
Embedded Linux Engineer - Yocto Project
Intel Open Source Technology Center