[Buildroot] Analysis of build failures

Vicente Olivert Riera Vincent.Riera at imgtec.com
Mon Sep 8 12:59:11 UTC 2014


On 09/08/2014 01:29 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Dear Vicente Olivert Riera,
>
> On Mon, 8 Sep 2014 13:20:56 +0100, Vicente Olivert Riera wrote:
>
>> One could think we should add that dependence to the
>> BR2_PACKAGE_QT_ARCH_SUPPORTS_WEBKIT symbols instead, but there are
>> packages depending on that symbol which compile fine on MIPS64 n32, for
>> instance grantlee.
>
> That doesn't make sense. More precisely, it's your commit
> a88dceb951de977ad2d896d697f87d98e9705280 that doesn't make sense.
> You're adding a "depends on BR2_PACKAGE_QT_ARCH_SUPPORTS_WEBKIT" to
> grantlee because grantlee has "select BR2_PACKAGE_QT_SCRIPT".
>
> The reason why your commit doesn't make sense appears clearly now: the
> set of architectures that have support for QtScript and QtWebkit is not
> the same. So, if QtScript is restricted to certain architectures,
> please introduce a BR2_PACKAGE_QT_ARCH_SUPPORTS_SCRIPT separate from
> BR2_PACKAGE_QT_ARCH_SUPPORTS_WEBKIT, and use them appropriately.
>
> Thomas

Those were my first days with Buildroot. Less than two weeks I guess.

Well, I think we should remove the dependence on 
BR2_PACKAGE_QT_ARCH_SUPPORTS_WEBKIT in both grantlee and qt_script 
packages. I made a confusion because qt_webkit was failing due to it's 
JavaScriptCore part. That's not related to the Qt's script modue, so 
qt_script (and the packages depending on qt_script) shouldn't depend on 
BR2_PACKAGE_QT_ARCH_SUPPORTS_WEBKIT.

Does this make sense to you?

-- 
Vincent


More information about the buildroot mailing list