<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/page.cgi?id=bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="5.0.6"
          urlbase="https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/"
          
          maintainer="it-coreprojects-helpdesk@linuxfoundation.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>2560</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2012-06-08 08:56:44 +0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>[multilib]lib64-core-image-sato build failed due to sanity check</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2012-06-18 07:03:17 +0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>7</classification_id>
          <classification>Build System, Metadata &amp; Runtime</classification>
          <product>Meta-yocto</product>
          <component>meta-yocto</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>x86</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Multiple</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>NOTABUG</resolution>
          
          
          <bug_file_loc></bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard></status_whiteboard>
          <keywords></keywords>
          <priority>Undecided</priority>
          <bug_severity>normal</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter name="Hongna Xu">hongnax.xu</reporter>
          <assigned_to name="Richard Purdie">richard.purdie</assigned_to>
          <cc>jiajun.xu</cc>
    
    <cc>laurentiu.serban</cc>
    
    <cc>ningx.ma</cc>
    
    <cc>poky.bs.watcher</cc>
    
    <cc>poky.watcher</cc>
    
    <cc>yilongx.y.sun</cc>
          
          
          <cf_os>---</cf_os>
          <cf_regression_type>---</cf_regression_type>
          
          <cf_docchange>---</cf_docchange>

      

      

      

          <comment_sort_order>oldest_to_newest</comment_sort_order>  
          <long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>21927</commentid>
    <comment_count>0</comment_count>
    <who name="Hongna Xu">hongnax.xu</who>
    <bug_when>2012-06-08 08:56:44 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>tree/branch: poky/master
git info :348da93e283b2b8454fd9cde80d4b17378e2a168

when build lib64-core-image-sato with multilib enable, i got the error:
*****************************************
ERROR:  OE-core&apos;s config sanity checker detected a potential misconfiguration.
    Either fix the cause of this error or at your own risk disable the checker (see sanity.conf).
    Following is the list of potential problems / advisories:

    Toolchain tunings invalid:
Multilib &apos;lib64&apos; (x86-64) is also the default tuning.

ERROR: Execution of event handler &apos;check_sanity_eventhandler&apos; failed
ERROR: Command execution failed: Exited with 1

Summary: There were 3 ERROR messages shown, returning a non-zero exit code.
**************************************************
The configuration I used for build is like following:
#######
MACHINE = &quot;qemux86-64&quot;
require conf/multilib.conf
MULTILIBS = &quot;multilib:lib64&quot;
DEFAULTTUNE_virtclass-multilib-lib64 = &quot;x86-64&quot;
#####</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>22142</commentid>
    <comment_count>1</comment_count>
    <who name="Richard Purdie">richard.purdie</who>
    <bug_when>2012-06-13 15:46:14 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Getting a warning about this configuration makes sense, you&apos;re trying to build two sets of librbaries with exactly the same optimisations. If this is one of our standard test cases, I think we need to adpat it, maybe by selecting a different tuning for one set of multilib libraries...</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>22270</commentid>
    <comment_count>2</comment_count>
    <who name="Jiajun Xu">jiajun.xu</who>
    <bug_when>2012-06-18 07:03:17 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>(In reply to comment #1)
&gt; Getting a warning about this configuration makes sense, you&apos;re trying to
&gt; build two sets of librbaries with exactly the same optimisations. If this is
&gt; one of our standard test cases, I think we need to adpat it, maybe by
&gt; selecting a different tuning for one set of multilib libraries...

Hi Richard,
It&apos;s OK for us to remove such case if it&apos;s expected. Meanwhile, we also have a test case to build 32bit library against qemux86, which has not been reported as warning in sanity.bbclass. I think the 2 combinations should be consistent if 64bit library build against qemux86-64 should fail.</thetext>
  </long_desc>
      
      

    </bug>

</bugzilla>