[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2 0/6] build: update scritps/config to kconfig-v5.6

Eneas Queiroz cotequeiroz at gmail.com
Sat Apr 11 21:41:59 EDT 2020

On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 7:23 PM Jo-Philipp Wich <jo at mein.io> wrote:
> Hi Eneas,
> I am sorry but I had to completely revert the kconfig bump. It thoroughly
> broke the package repository builds since multiple days and the fatal
> recursive dependencies make it a no-go for master, at least as far as our
> build infrastructure is concerned.
> Right now, a single malformed feed package can entirely break the builder,
> across all architectures.
> I am happy to reapply it but first we have to figure out why things like
> http://builds.openwrt.org/master/packages/builders/arm_fa526/builds/224/steps/compile/logs/stdio
> happen and how we can prevent them in the future.
> I'm also strongly in favor of making recursive deps a warning, at least when
> Regards,
> Jo


I'm really sorry--and embarrassed, really--to have caused all this
trouble.  I'll see what I can do from here, but I'm not familiar
enough with the build bot system to do much on my own--and that was
the origin of all problems.

As for the recursive dependency warning/error, at first I thought
about using CONFIG_BUILDBOT but then scripts/config/conf may be built
before .config even exist.  I added a make option, so the bots could
just add WARN_RECURSIVE_DEPS=1 to the make args.  Even changing the
recursive dep to a warning would not have been enough to overcome
this, for example:

feeds/base/package/utils/busybox/config/Config.in:712: invalid statement

I'm not sure if the feeds/base/package structure is the same as
$(TOPDIR)/package, but 1da014f should have quoted the source filenames
in package/utils/busybox/config/Config.in.

Does anybody have any suggestion about how this could be moved forward?


openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org

More information about the openwrt-devel mailing list