11745 2017-07-02 14:14:03 +0000 nightly-refkit CreateBBLayersConf should be dynamic 2017-08-07 15:01:13 +0000 1 1 5 Infrastructure AutoBuilder autobuilder unspecified x86 Multiple RESOLVED FIXED Medium enhancement 2.4 M3 1 stephano stephano akuster infras.ab.watcher Infras.watcher joshuagloe mikko.ylinen pidge --- --- No (bug/feature does not impact docs) oldest_to_newest 74701 0 stephano 2017-07-02 14:14:03 +0000 Since we are parsing and building all the images in refkit-ci.inc, a dynamic set of images is built. We should be adding layers to bblayers.conf dynamically to avoid errors as refkit-ci.inc changes. 74815 1 joshuagloe 2017-07-06 14:46:36 +0000 refkit, quite nicely and correctly, uses TEMPLATECONF to provide a complete bblayers.conf We should probably have the autobuilder machinery be able to use the automatically generated bblayers.conf (and local.conf) from there. 75225 2 joshuagloe 2017-07-21 15:16:01 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > refkit, quite nicely and correctly, uses TEMPLATECONF to provide a complete > bblayers.conf > > We should probably have the autobuilder machinery be able to use the > automatically generated bblayers.conf (and local.conf) from there. The difficulty here is that we need to use the OE-Core and bitbake from the top-level directory, not those cloned as part of the refkit checkout. 75252 3 stephano 2017-07-24 14:25:35 +0000 (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > refkit, quite nicely and correctly, uses TEMPLATECONF to provide a complete > > bblayers.conf > > > > We should probably have the autobuilder machinery be able to use the > > automatically generated bblayers.conf (and local.conf) from there. > > The difficulty here is that we need to use the OE-Core and bitbake from the > top-level directory, not those cloned as part of the refkit checkout. Shouldn't we be doing both? I would think we'd want this setup: 1) Test refkit build exactly as they expect; with all their layers and revs. 2) Test meta-refkit with the HEAD of Yocto master Test 1 would ensure refkit builds as expected while test 2 would provide a "head's up" for future problems with Yocto. 75253 4 joshuagloe 2017-07-24 14:33:37 +0000 Test one already happens on refkit's CI, whilst test two is the value add we provide by building on the Yocto AB. 75291 5 stephano 2017-07-25 15:22:29 +0000 *** Bug 11823 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** 75306 6 akuster 2017-07-25 23:02:56 +0000 looks like it failed again. https://autobuilder.yocto.io/builders/nightly-refkit/builds/75/steps/BuildImages/logs/stdio NOTE: Starting bitbake server... ERROR: Layer 'refkit' depends on layer 'iot-web', but this layer is not enabled in your configuration ERROR: Layer 'refkit-gateway' depends on layer 'iot-web', but this layer is not enabled in your configuration 75690 7 stephano 2017-08-07 15:01:13 +0000 Merged in 07c52d2b3ee445d84f24ad5c016f89615a52bab9