Hi Stefan,
On Thu, 1 Sept 2022 at 00:12, Stefan Herbrechtsmeier stefan.herbrechtsmeier-oss@weidmueller.com wrote:
Hi Quentin,
Am 31.08.2022 um 19:44 schrieb Simon Glass:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 09:55, Quentin Schulz foss+uboot@0leil.net wrote:
From: Quentin Schulz quentin.schulz@theobroma-systems.com
The binary is looked on the system by the suffix of the packer class. This means binman was looking for btool_gzip on the system and not gzip.
Are you sure? I test it and the name is already gzip because the bintool is requested as gzip. The find_bintool_class function only change the class name.
When I tested it, it was not picking up the correct version without this patch.
Therefore, let's pass "gzip" as the name so that it can be found and used.
Fixes: 0f369d79925a ("binman: Add gzip bintool") Signed-off-by: Quentin Schulz quentin.schulz@theobroma-systems.com
tools/binman/btool/btool_gzip.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
Oops! I wonder how we could test this? One way would be to require those tools to be present and write a test that reads the version, I suppose.
We already have a test for the compressions: testCompUtilVersions
Regards Stefan
Regards, Simon