[meta-ti] [morty/rocko/master][PATCH] ti-xdctools-common: Add XDC tools to -dev package

[Joshua Watt]

On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 14:34 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> Do you still need this on morty?

If possible. We are (unfortunately) still on morty.

> 
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 09:45:12AM -0500, Joshua Watt wrote:
> > b42044aaf removed the XDC tools from the main package, but this
> > broke
> > the ability to include the XDC tools in an SDK. Add the tools back
> > to
> > the -dev package. Also fix up INSANE_SKIP.
> > 
> > Change-Id: I902cc1a841e40c1a3bdc5286d03f999276119052
> > Signed-off-by: Joshua Watt <JPEWhacker at gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  recipes-ti/devtools/ti-xdctools-common.inc | 4 +++-
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/recipes-ti/devtools/ti-xdctools-common.inc b/recipes-
> > ti/devtools/ti-xdctools-common.inc
> > index d2d0df45..a3949cad 100644
> > --- a/recipes-ti/devtools/ti-xdctools-common.inc
> > +++ b/recipes-ti/devtools/ti-xdctools-common.inc
> > @@ -13,12 +13,14 @@ do_install() {
> >      cp ${CP_ARGS}  ${S}/* ${D}${XDC_INSTALL_DIR_RECIPE}
> >  }
> >  
> > +FILES_${PN}-dev = "${XDC_INSTALL_DIR_RECIPE}"

I was going to ask about this.... It seems counter to the mechanism
used in some of the other (TI) recipes to put these files in the -dev
package. It seems that most recipes that are intended to be native
tools include their files in the "${PN}" package instead of the "${PN}-
dev" package. For example, ti-cgt-pru, ti-cgt-arm-native, and ti-cgt6x-
7-native all do this. The recipes that are putting files in "-dev"
appear to be on-target recipes. This layout makes more sense to me, and
fits better with our use case. What we would like to do is add:
 
 TOOLCHAIN_HOST_TASK += "nativesdk-ti-xdctools"

however, with this patch as currently written, we would have to do:

 TOOLCHAIN_HOST_TASK += "nativesdk-ti-xdctools-dev"


I used -dev in this patch because the referenced commit removed the
files from "${PN}", and I wasn't sure if there was a reason (that, and
at the time I didn't fully comprehend the difference between native and
target recipes that I described above). Do you know if there was a
reason the FILE_${PN} was removed in b42044aaf?

Thanks,
Joshua Watt

> > +
> >  BBCLASSEXTEND = "native nativesdk"
> >  
> >  INHIBIT_PACKAGE_STRIP = "1"
> >  INHIBIT_SYSROOT_STRIP = "1"
> >  INHIBIT_PACKAGE_DEBUG_SPLIT = "1"
> > -INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "installed-vs-shipped"
> > +INSANE_SKIP_${PN}-dev = "libdir dev-elf arch file-rdeps"
> >  
> >  # Prevent internal libs from getting picked up
> >  PRIVATE_LIBS = " \
> > -- 
> > 2.17.0
> > 
> > -- 
> > _______________________________________________
> > meta-ti mailing list
> > meta-ti at yoctoproject.org
> > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti
> >