[yocto] Fwd: build failure on ubuntu 64bits development system
William Mills
wmills at ti.com
Wed Jan 18 07:15:24 PST 2012
On 01/18/2012 10:04 AM, James Abernathy wrote:
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *William Mills* <wmills at ti.com <mailto:wmills at ti.com>>
> Date: Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 9:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [yocto] build failure on ubuntu 64bits development system
> To: Gary Thomas <gary at mlbassoc.com <mailto:gary at mlbassoc.com>>
> Cc: yocto at yoctoproject.org <mailto:yocto at yoctoproject.org>
>
>
>
>
> On 01/18/2012 09:51 AM, Gary Thomas wrote:
>
> On 2012-01-18 07 <tel:2012-01-18%2007>:42, James Abernathy wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 9:30 AM, James Abernathy
> <jfabernathy at gmail.com <mailto:jfabernathy at gmail.com>
> <mailto:jfabernathy at gmail.com <mailto:jfabernathy at gmail.com>>__>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 7:55 AM, James Abernathy
> <jfabernathy at gmail.com <mailto:jfabernathy at gmail.com>
> <mailto:jfabernathy at gmail.com <mailto:jfabernathy at gmail.com>>__>
> wrote:
>
> I just built a new development pc and installed Ubuntu 11.10
> x64. I wonder if there are any new requirements to building
> Yocto in that environment? I got an error right
> off, but then it complete the first 63 task and stopped
> successfully. error below:
>
> jim at ubuntu:~/poky/build-cdv$ bitbake core-image-sato
> Pseudo is not present but is required, building this first
> before the main build
> Parsing recipes: 100%
> |#############################__####################| Time: 00:00:25
> Parsing of 797 .bb files complete (0 cached, 797 parsed). 1037
> targets, 22 skipped, 0 masked, 0 errors.
> ERROR: Execution of event handler 'run_buildstats' failed
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "run_buildstats(e)", line 18, in
> run_buildstats(e=<bb.event.__BuildStarted object at 0x4c338d0>)
> File "buildstats.bbclass", line 21, in
> set_device(e=<bb.event.__BuildStarted object at 0x4c338d0>)
> UnboundLocalError: local variable 'rdev' referenced before
> assignment
>
>
> Any ideas?
>
> JIm A
>
>
> I went back and tried using the tarballs for poky edison and
> cedartrail bsp and the errors don't occur. So I'm guessing the
> issue isn't related to Ubuntu 32 vs. 64 bit.
>
>
> I spoke too soon. Same error in edison tarballs. I looked at the
> code and I can see an place were rdev could go un assigned. If
> you fell out of the for loop without passing any of
> the if conditions, rdev would be unassigned. That must be what
> is happening in Ubuntu 11.10 x64
>
> Anybody building with Ubuntu 11.10 x64? This doesn't happen on x32
>
> Jim A
>
>
> def set_device(e):
> tmpdir = bb.data.getVar('TMPDIR', e.data, True)
> try:
> os.remove(bb.data.getVar('__DEVFILE', e.data, True))
> except:
> pass
> ##############################__##############################__################
> # We look for the volume TMPDIR lives on. To do all disks would
> make little
> # sense and not give us any particularly useful data. In theory
> we could do
> # something like stick DL_DIR on a different partition and this
> would
> # throw stats gathering off. The same goes with SSTATE_DIR.
> However, let's
> # get the basics in here and work on the cornercases later.
> ##############################__##############################__################
> device=os.stat(tmpdir)
> majordev=os.major(device.st___dev)
> minordev=os.minor(device.st___dev)
> for line in open("/proc/diskstats", "r"):
> if majordev == int(line.split()[0]) and minordev ==
> int(line.split()[1]):
> rdev=line.split()[2]
> file = open(bb.data.getVar('DEVFILE', e.data, True), "w")
> file.write(rdev)
> file.close()
>
>
> Can you show what the differences are between /proc/diskstats
> on the two systems? That's obviously what's causing the error.
>
>
> If your build dir is encyptfs or a fuse device or anything that is not a
> direct block device you will get this error. This is to be fixed in
> 1.1.1 but encyptfs will still have other problems.
>
> I build the Ubuntu 11.10 x64 system with 2 drives setup as Soft RAID 0.
> I picked btrfs as the file system for no particular reason. Should I go
> back to ext4 or is RAID 0 the problem?
No, I would not do that yet. I would think software RAID would present
a block device so would not trigger this error.
> 9 0 md0 133691 0 2218832 0 67133 0 5629616 0 0 0 0
> 9 1 md1 235 0 1880 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Your build dir is in md0 or md1 (wrt your other post)
>
> JIm A
>
> _________________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto at yoctoproject.org <mailto:yocto at yoctoproject.org>
> https://lists.yoctoproject.__org/listinfo/yocto
> <https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
More information about the yocto
mailing list