IRC logs for #baserock for Wednesday, 2016-04-06

*** gtristan has quit IRC05:18
*** paulwaters_ has joined #baserock07:00
*** edcragg has joined #baserock07:24
*** bruce_ has joined #baserock07:29
*** fay_ has joined #baserock07:32
*** bashrc_ has joined #baserock08:03
*** rdale has joined #baserock08:23
*** anahuelamo has joined #baserock08:24
*** jonathanmaw has joined #baserock08:30
*** edcragg has quit IRC08:50
*** ssam2 has joined #baserock08:57
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v ssam208:57
*** edcragg has joined #baserock09:13
*** locallycompact has joined #baserock09:32
franredpedroalvarez, should we revert until jjardon sends the patch to fix the issue? (IMHO the change needs some thoughs as I wrote in the patch)10:13
*** gtristan has joined #baserock10:14
pedroalvarezfranred: I agree, it's going to take some time10:15
pedroalvarezalso it might be missing more dependencies10:17
pedroalvarezfranred: thanks10:19
franredpedroalvarez, thanks for merging it10:21
rjekDoes lorry detect the overwriting of lightweight, non-annotated, tagS?10:54
JPohlmannHi folks, how's it going?11:03
ssam2rjek: lorry doesn't try to detect any of that11:06
* locallycompact pats out sleeve fires11:06
ssam2rjek: you can configure whether it force-updates the tags or not, so you can make it break on force-overwrites to things in refs/11:06
ssam2rjek: not sure if lightweight, non-annotated tags exist in the refs/ namespace though11:07
ssam2JPohlmann: prosiacally. how about you11:07
ssam2prosaically even11:07
JPohlmannssam2: Everything's good over here. I'm bathing in the sunlight that comes through the window while doing some hacking.11:10
franredJPohlmann, you know that happens in MCR too.... once a year ;-)11:12
mwilliams_ct[citation needed]11:13
pedroalvarezfranred: you have to be lucky to have a bath with sunlight here in MCR...!11:13
mwilliams_ctssam2: according to lightweigt tags are in regs/tags/. would you expect lorry to detect changes to that as a result?11:15
JPohlmannfranred: There's certainly less rain in Luebeck but MCR is better than it's reputation ;)11:16
JPohlmannits even11:16
ssam2mwilliams_ct: i'd expect it to break if force-updates to refs/tags weren't allowed, yes11:22
mwilliams_ctCool, thanks11:23
*** toscalix has joined #baserock13:01
*** tiagogomes has quit IRC14:20
*** toscalix has quit IRC15:54
*** franred has quit IRC16:05
*** bruce_ has quit IRC16:23
*** jonathanmaw has quit IRC16:23
*** ssam2 has quit IRC16:42
*** bashrc_ has quit IRC16:59
*** gtristan has quit IRC17:08
*** bruce_ has joined #baserock17:25
*** locallycompact has quit IRC17:33
*** rdale has quit IRC17:37
*** edcragg has quit IRC18:05
jjardonHi, what is the easiest way to build one of the x86_32 systems in a x86_64 machine?18:53
jjardonmmm, I guess a 32bit chroot18:54
jjardonthis can help me:
*** fay_ has quit IRC19:01
jjardonrjek: how that would actually work?19:02
rjekOh, it wouldn't pass -m32 would it19:02
rjek64 bit executables will still run, but uname will lie.19:03
rjekI suppose the build tool needs to know about -m3219:03
radiofreechroot is fine19:09
radiofreeif you do linux32 chroot .19:09
radiofreeoh, using baserock19:09
*** locallycompact has joined #baserock19:32
jjardonIs there any place where this is documented in the wiki?20:22
radiofreeare you using ybd?22:53
radiofreemaybe you can just pass the arch as x8622:53
radiofreejjardon: ^22:54
jjardonradiofree: I tried x86_32 but didnt work22:54
radiofreewhat failed?22:54
jjardonone sec22:55
jjardonradiofree: ^22:57
*** edcragg has joined #baserock22:57
radiofreesomething seems very broken there checking target system type... Invalid configuration `x86_32-bootstrap-linux-gnu': machine `x86_32-bootstrap' not recognized22:58
radiofreei would imagine simply extracting an existing x86_32 base system tarball and doing `linxu32 chroot .` would work22:58
radiofreeand it's probably not even essential to run linux32 (I've always done that out of habit because mesa used to be a pain in the arse)22:59
jjardonradiofree: you mean build system, right? let me try that23:00
radiofreeyou'll probably need to mount bind proc, and copy /etc/resolv.conf into the etc/ folder in the chroot23:01
jjardonI think the baserock-chroot already do that for me?
* jjardon forgot how slow this hotel connection is23:03
radiofreei've never used that23:03
radiofreeit seems to demand i install things in /opt23:03
radiofreeinterestingly you can't actually use that from within a baserock system!23:04
radiofree(no schroot)23:04
jjardontime to file a bug? :P23:04
radiofreeyou can essential do the same thing as
radiofreebut with x86_32 (obviously)23:05
jjardoncool, thanks23:06
paulsherwoodjjardon: any idead about ?23:11
paulsherwoodistm it's more likely to be definitions than ybd?23:12
* jjardon checks23:12
paulsherwoodoh, i see this has been discussed above?23:12
jjardonpaulsherwood: nope, she is trying to crosscompile to x86_32 in a x86_64 machine23:13
jjardonyep, Im trying to do the same now as well :)23:13
jjardonanahuelamo: ^23:13
paulsherwood23:58 < radiofree> something seems very broken there checking target system type... Invalid configuration `x86_32-bootstrap-linux-gnu': machine `x86_32-bootstrap' not recognized23:14
paulsherwoodsounds like the same issue?23:14
radiofreei guess that really should work23:14
radiofreebut it's probably awkward at the "building your compiler using the hosts toolchain" stage23:15
radiofreehence using a chroot23:15
paulsherwoodah, ack.23:15
jjardonalso, Im a bit worried about those "--with-lib-path="=$PREFIX/lib:=$PREFIX/lib64"" lines; dont think they make a lot of sense in a 32 bit system23:16
paulsherwoodanahuelamo claimed morph succeeded... i wonder what's the difference23:17
jjardonmmm, not in my chroot:23:18
jjardonmaybe she was using a vm?23:19
paulsherwoodyes, i believe she was23:20
paulsherwoodgdp *mearly* building now...23:25
jjardonpaulsherwood: that broke with the upgrade to Qt5.6; any idea why genivi needs a special qtwayland?23:30
jjardonpaulsherwood: radiofree ? or ? We really need to have a working Qt in the cache23:33
* jjardon can't believe is saying that XD23:33
* paulsherwood has no idea why genivi needs special qtwayland23:33
jjardonpaulsherwood: can you try to build that version of qtwayland? if it fails maybe we have to rebase that patch against qtwayland 5.623:37
jjardonmmm, seems that patch has been already merged:
* jjardon doesnt know enough about the genivi system to know if something more is needed23:41
* paulsherwood neither23:45
*** edcragg has quit IRC23:59

Generated by 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!