[U-Boot] [ANN] U-Boot v2017.07-rc2 released

[Peter Robinson]

On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 08, 2017 at 09:27:59AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On 21 June 2017 at 01:07, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> Simon, do you have some suggestions on what to do here?  Thanks!
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>> Tom
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> My guess is that there is already a libfdt.py in the system. Someone
>> >>>>>> else reported this too.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> We could perhaps change the ordering in PYTHONPATH so that our one is first.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> No, I'm not sure that's completely the case because I first saw a
>> >>>>> related issue before my dtc had the python patch set added to it, I
>> >>>>> would actually prefer to build with the distro dtc rather than a fork
>> >>>>> of upstream like we use to.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> OK I think I see what is happening then. It seems to be picking up
>> >>>> _libfdt.so from your system and libfdy.py from U-Boot. If so that
>> >>>> seems like a bad idea at the best of times.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Despite upstreaming efforts we still have local libfdt changes in
>> >>>> U-Boot. The main one is fdtgrep. I did try to upstream it a while back
>> >>>> but failed. I've been thinking of trying again but have not mustered
>> >>>> the energy.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> This particular error could probably be worked around in the short
>> >>>> term by dropping FDT_ERR_TOODEEP. But do we really want to allow this
>> >>>> sort of thing? I think we should either use one libfdt module or the
>> >>>> other, not a mixture of the two
>> >>>
>> >>> I suspect your right but I don't want to get into a situation where
>> >>> something might work in the kernel and and not in u-boot or
>> >>> vice-versa, and as things like overlays come into play where they
>> >>> could be applied to either the possible differences get greater and
>> >>> from a distro PoV that increased the requirements of support and debug
>> >>> and believe me people will do weird shit that they expect you to
>> >>> magically fix with little information hence my reluctance to diverge.
>> >>
>> >> I'm not sure what to do about this other than what I suggested. I
>> >> wonder it if is possible to detect the case where there is a mismatch
>> >> with the installation?
>> >
>> > Was that dropping FDT_ERR_TOODEEP? Why do we diverge from upstream on
>> > this, what does it do? Maybe provide an option to specify whether to
>> > use external dtc or bundled?
>>
>> So dropping dtc from our deps to try and get anything on 2017.07 built
>> I get for a bunch of devices I get this:
>>
>> /builddir/build/BUILD/u-boot-2017.07-rc3/scripts/dtc-version.sh: line
>> 18: dtc: command not found
>> rm -f .tmp_quiet_recordmcount
>> *** Your dtc is too old, please upgrade to dtc 1.4 or newer
>>
>> Can we please have some level of resolution for 2017.07 GA?
>
> Can we short term do the thing where I guess it was PYTHONPATH gets
> modified so that you only pick up U-Boot provided parts here?

Sure, as long as we have a commitment to a read fix for 2017.09