#4468 closed defect (fixed)
waf build system does not generate the same bspopts.h
Reported by: | Chris Johns | Owned by: | Chris Johns <chrisj@…> |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | high | Milestone: | 6.1 |
Component: | build | Version: | 6 |
Severity: | normal | Keywords: | wafblocker |
Cc: | Blocked By: | ||
Blocking: | #4081 |
Description
Building with autoconf
and the command line of:
$ ../rtems.git/configure --target=powerpc-rtems6 --enable-rtemsbsp=mvme2307
gives:
$ grep BSP_CONSOLE_BAUD `find . -name bspopts.h` #define BSP_CONSOLE_BAUD 9600
Building with waf
and a config of ...
[DEFAULT] BUILD_TESTS = True RTEMS_POSIX_API = True [powerpc/mvme2307]
gives:
$ grep BSP_CONSOLE_BAUD `find . -name bspopts.h` #define BSP_CONSOLE_BAUD 115200
The default should be 9600 and the motorola_powerpc
BSP is listed in the options under 9600. Something is broken in the waf BSP opts handling.
Change History (9)
comment:1 Changed on 07/14/21 at 04:44:57 by Chris Johns
comment:2 Changed on 07/14/21 at 05:01:02 by Chris Johns
The optconsolebaud.yml
file lists powerpc/motorola_powerpc
as a variant and it is a family. The ability to specify a family for default is something I think is needed. I do not like needing to list all BSPs is something we should require we do?
Are BSPs that INHERIT
supported?
I wonder how you take a family given the variant?
comment:3 Changed on 07/14/21 at 06:38:28 by Chris Johns
Hmmm it seems the options are all required to have a default-by-variant
. I am not sure if this is by design and for a reason, a hang over from the path to these spec files or it could be optional?
I will make it optional and I will make default-by-family
optional.
comment:4 Changed on 07/15/21 at 00:03:15 by Chris Johns <chrisj@…>
Owner: | set to Chris Johns <chrisj@…> |
---|---|
Resolution: | → fixed |
Status: | new → closed |
In [changeset:"6f2aa8ad36e3aaffc9fa2cb8c744b04da7339ee2/rtems" 6f2aa8ad/rtems]:
comment:5 Changed on 07/15/21 at 06:07:50 by Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber@…>
In [changeset:"61071489ff37df682be89a56f29d2941fcc7cc28/rtems" 6107148/rtems]:
comment:6 Changed on 07/15/21 at 06:07:54 by Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber@…>
In [changeset:"b6092cb82c530c309bc0c48003453f53be830e02/rtems" b6092cb/rtems]:
comment:7 Changed on 07/15/21 at 06:10:06 by Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber@…>
In [changeset:"6c1928caed28183c2abe405963602a2d4a3116d0/rtems" 6c1928c/rtems]:
comment:8 Changed on 08/18/21 at 09:26:43 by Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber@…>
In [changeset:"ebdfa24bff814134b8f42efc7ed386afcfa90eff/rtems" ebdfa24b/rtems]:
comment:9 Changed on 08/30/21 at 09:03:04 by Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber@…>
In [changeset:"d223ec99ae7f84f49844e9421d831f3690b2b93a/rtems-docs" d223ec9/rtems-docs]:
The options code is not being passed the variant, it is passed the BSP ....
gives: