[PATCH] 5: Use a specific RTEMS tools version

[Sebastian Huber]

On 18/04/18 02:27, Chris Johns wrote:
> On 17/04/2018 21:18, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> On 17/04/18 12:12, Chris Johns wrote:
>>> On 17/4/18 6:49 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>>> On 17/04/18 10:30, Chris Johns wrote:
>>>>> On 17/04/2018 18:21, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>>>>> Download via HTTPS RTEMS file server.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Close 3241.
>>>>> Can you please explain why this solves the issue in the ticket? I do not see
>>>>> how
>>>>> they relate.
>>>> This solves the ticket since git is no longer involved.
>>>>
>>>>> There can be issues with a sequence of git commands if you are switching
>>>>> branches. This can be resolved by improving the sequence used.
>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg
>>>>>> b/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg
>>>>>> index 6efc4e3..e0178f0 100644
>>>>>> --- a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg
>>>>>> +++ b/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg
>>>>>> @@ -7,9 +7,33 @@
>>>>>>     #
>>>>>>     %if %{rsb_released}
>>>>>>      %define rtems_tools_version %{rsb_version}
>>>>>> +%else
>>>>>> + %define rtems_tools_version ec419a05ee52869a7d5b8712ea8e7a7d74fde096
>>>>>>     %endif
>>>>> Sorry, this is not the right place for this sort of detail. Version details
>>>>> need
>>>>> to be in the release defaults or overridden in a an arch specific file.
>>>> Sorry, I didn't understand the logic for the rtems_tools_version definition at
>>>> all. Why is it dependent on rsb_released?
>>> If the RSB is released the RTEMS ftp server is used for downloads and the
>>> version is the RTEMS release verson. The RTEMS tools do not have a separate
>>> release cycle from RTEMS and use the same version numbers.
>>>
>>>>> Why this version?
>>>> It is the latest commit. So, just the thing that would have been picked by the
>>>> current RSB.
>>>>
>>>> The use of a random HEAD is a major problem from my point of view. It makes the
>>>> RSB outcome build time dependent and irreproducible.
>>> Releases are matched. I do not follow how this resolves any dependence issue
>>> that may appear such as the dl06 and rtems-ld.
>> For the latest test suite you need an up to date rtems-ld. If you built the
>> tools with RSB 703532cb04c6990fb21e97cb7347a16e9df11108 two months ago, then it
>> will not work. If you build with RSB 703532cb04c6990fb21e97cb7347a16e9df11108
>> today, then everything is fine. This is a serious defect from my point of view.
> How is this any different from all the newlib changes you made? To me it is the
> same.
>
> Lets not get to too tangled up here it is development. I clearly stated in the
> cover email a tools update was needed and in future I will send a single
> specific email to the list to say an update is needed.

Sorry, for the confusion, but the tool update is not an issue for me.

My issue is the irreproducible tool chain build. With this time 
dependent rtems-tools selection you cannot say RSB commit XYZ works with 
RTEMS commit ABC. In addition you have to say build the RSB after date 
LMN (and not after IJK?). You build with the same RSB today and tomorrow 
and potentially get two different tool sets? This is a serious defect 
from my point of view.

-- 
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH

Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone   : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax     : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail  : sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
PGP     : Public key available on request.

Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.