On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 03:46:02PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Friday 15 May 2020 09:20:20 Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 09:33:47AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Thursday 14 May 2020 20:01:19 Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:41:52AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Saturday 09 May 2020 16:56:10 Tom Rini wrote:
On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 06:35:40PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Saturday 09 May 2020 21:58:19 Lokesh Vutla wrote: > > On 08/05/20 6:40 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > > On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 02:52:55PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > >> On Tuesday 28 April 2020 09:37:21 Pali Rohár wrote: > > >>> On Monday 27 April 2020 14:00:47 Tom Rini wrote: > > >>>> I'll take care of that shortly. Otherwise: > > >>>> > > >>>> Reviewed-by: Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com > > >>> > > >>> Ok, thank you! > > >> > > >> Hello Tom! Will you take whole patch series? Or is there anything else > > >> needed to be done from my side for this N900 patch series? > > > > > > Lokesh is the custodian for the TI tree these days, so whenever it's in > > > his next PR. Thanks! > > > > > > > I see gitlab is failing to build this patch[0]. Does cross compiler needs to be > > changed? > > > > [0] https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-ti/-/jobs/91228 > > Cross compiler arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc needs to be in $PATH. > > I figured out that on Travis it is available in ~/.buildman-toolchains > but not exported to $PATH. So for Travis build I added... > > export PATH=~/.buildman-toolchains/gcc-9.2.0-nolibc/arm-linux-gnueabi/bin/:$PATH > > ... as can be seen in the last patch. > > Do you know where is installed arm-linux-gnueabi toolchain on Gitlab? > Maybe Tom knows it as he already wrote that would take care of updating > Gitlab image.
All of the buildman-fetched toolchains are always in the same place, so a similar change to gitlab/azure will fix those. Thanks!
I see that all patches except this one were merged, thanks.
Tom, are you going to take look at this last patch?
It already passed on travis [1] [2] but I do not have those gitlab and azure accounts to trigger their jobs. But I think that only correct $PATH is needed for azure and gitlab.
[1] - https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/pull/30 [2] - https://travis-ci.org/github/u-boot/u-boot/jobs/679162986
No, I've been waiting for you to make an attempt at fixing the jobs. Anyone can get Azure running and there's enough examples to make a reasonable attempt at making it work without testing.
So can you give me pointers how to run it?
It's a well documented public service. The only slight trick is you need to point it at .azure-pipeline.yml and not whatever the default non-dotfile name is.
Tom, sorry, but I grepped whole u-boot source code repository and I did not find any documentation nor README nor any other information how to run / extend or modify this service. That is why I asked for some information... e.g. how I can I run it and check if it is working or not.
And is there something more needed for travis job?
All 3 CIs need to pass, but no, if Travis is passing, that part is fine. Since Azure/GitLab share the same docker image (which sadly I don't see how to make Travis also do), that's why fixing Azure should let you see what to drop in for GitLab.
I prepared this N900 Travis setup for your request [1] and I do not like to see it thrown away, just because there is unrelated issue on Azure.
I have used Travis before, so I know that opening pull request on github triggers Travis build and Github directly shows me links to result.
But whatever I did, I was not able to trigger that azure from github pull request.
[1] - https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2018-December/353019.html
Sorry, I mean Azure itself is a well documented public SaaS CI tool. It plugs in to GitHub just as easy as Travis does, but runs quicker.