Concept of gcc-source prevents cve-check to detect existing
CVE patch file.
So ignore this CVE in all recipes using gcc-source via this
include file.
(From OE-Core rev: 04511734c6dc8c7dda3a943b385cd273d012d8c7)
Signed-off-by: Peter Marko <peter.marko@siemens.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Sakoman <steve@sakoman.com>
This function is referencing '${S}/..'.
It uses ${S} only as good known directory path to start
traversing from, and it does not need it to exist or be populated.
If ${S} does not exist yet, the function will fail because
it cannot evaluate path .. from non-existing directory.
Reproducer (verified in master and kirkstone):
bitbake gcc -c deploy_source_date_epoch
bitbake gcc -c cleansstate
rm -rf build/tmp
bitbake gcc -c deploy_source_date_epoch
(From OE-Core rev: 728018bbfe1de53661881a05e0359083ad544f97)
Signed-off-by: Peter Marko <peter.marko@siemens.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
(cherry picked from commit 42661a59cda164b2d236ffc35b4d8cf43312b677)
Signed-off-by: Steve Sakoman <steve@sakoman.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The source date epoch for gcc isn't being transferred from the shared
workdir to the current WORKDIR for the specific recipe. This results in
the clamping code within sstate.bbclass using a value from 2011 which
changes the timestamps of many files. Since this happens part way
through the build, if pieces of gcc haven't built, or build/rebuild
later, we see things rebuilding when they should not and for generated
files, races are possible.
Fix this by copying the SDE from the shared workdir into the recipe
workdir.
[YOCTO #14953]
(From OE-Core rev: 0511f24264bcc27d6b61edd2e16f899c985eb8ad)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
(cherry picked from commit b996293b4c8ab7ff3ed852045d17290df29205df)
Signed-off-by: Steve Sakoman <steve@sakoman.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
gcc-source is the only gcc recipe meant to handle the fetch/unpack/patch
tasks, the other gcc recipes then depend on this.
This approach has been creating some confusion for tools like the archiver.
The simplest way to signal to these processes that there is no source
is to empty SRC_URI at the same time we disable the other tasks.
(From OE-Core rev: 0df9d45e0be59e55e585e6d25dedbf0fc55c490c)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
This means you can have one gcc version for some gcc recipes
(e.g. crosssdk/nativesdk) and another gcc version for target code.
Also remove the preferred version entry from the default toolchains
list since the version issue is now handled automatically.
We also need to specifically handle gcc-source in the license handling
code since expanding ${PV} in the base class isn't possible. Since
gcc-source doesn't generate any packages directly this shouldn't be
an issue and whitelisting in this way is easiest (and matches the
rest of the toolchain handling).
(From OE-Core rev: 67db7182faf6742b0d971d61d8c5ba34f69d2e12)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Whilst gcc doesn't have any source to fetch, it still needs a fetch task so that
a world fetch can run without errors. So instead of deleting the fetch task,
stub it.
(From OE-Core rev: 8e68ebbddc2bc41eb6cb607c51d6a80c54c4199d)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The current implementation of shared work for gcc is at best confusing. It relies
on the fetch/unpack/patch tasks having exactly the same stamps and if this gets
broken for some reason, its hard to figure out what the problem is. It also
leads to complex code in bitbake.
The benefits of shared work for gcc are clear but a better approach is needed. This
patch adjusts things so that a single new recipe (gcc-source) provides the
fetch/unpack/patch/preconfigure tasks, the rest of gcc simply depends on these tasks
and have no fetch/unpack/patch tasks of their own.
This means we should get the significant benefits (disk usage/performance) of the
single source tree but in a way which has less potential for problems and is
easier for people to understand. The cost is an extra recipe/some inc files
which is probably a good tradeoff.
(From OE-Core rev: ceaa0a448dc5ebddb4f7fb94fb8a503a1c0248c3)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
