devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #21
Posted 25 April 2021 - 15:10
Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Ultimate (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)
Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.
Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #22
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #23
Posted 27 April 2021 - 10:02
#WanWizard
I tried to split kodi_18.inc and create the .bbappend in meta-vuplus but it is impossible...purposedly blocked.
https://github.com/v...4b4896eb103c243
We have two options imho:
1- insist with vuplus and revert that commit. Need to add layer dependencies as well to the openpli layer in this case.
2 -create a bogus kodi-vuplus_18.bb which includes the main .bb. Ofc layer deps should be added.
Any idea?
Cheers
A.A.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #24
Posted 27 April 2021 - 10:07
read somewhere in other forums in Openspa kodi 18.9 is working fine in mips (duo2 ) no audio issue at all .
is it true ?
Yes, on vuduo2 the OE-A images provide a running kodi for stb. I did not test sound on it yet.
We are now trying to spot the difference making kodi crash on OpenPli: we are basically sure it builds correctly.
I personally don't know kodi internals, I think it tries to open some connection and fails (SIGBUS).
But which one? Linux input? Sound bus? dvb video sink?Networking? ....
WIP
A.A.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #25
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #26
Posted 27 April 2021 - 11:23
read somewhere in other forums in Openspa kodi 18.9 is working fine in mips (duo2 ) no audio issue at all .
is it true ?
Yes, to answer your question.
I have tried Openspa with Kodi 18.9 on both DUO2 (mips) and Ultimo4k. (arm)
Both are working good and with sound.
Thanks for the reply . I have tested now to . yes its working fine in my duo2 and duo4k to
DM-900 ,DM-520, Vu+Duo2
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #27
Posted 27 April 2021 - 11:32
https://github.com/v...4b4896eb103c243
We have two options imho:
1- insist with vuplus and revert that commit. Need to add layer dependencies as well to the openpli layer in this case.
2 -create a bogus kodi-vuplus_18.bb which includes the main .bb. Ofc layer deps should be added.
What exactly is the issue with this?
It only removes bbappend capability from the BSP, which is indeed a good thing, we don't want a BSP appending to recipies outside the BSP.
So if kodi for VU+ requires something special, it needs to be addressed in the kodi recipes (there are already exceptions for VU+ present).
Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Ultimate (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)
Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.
Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #28
Posted 27 April 2021 - 12:33
https://github.com/v...4b4896eb103c243
We have two options imho:
1- insist with vuplus and revert that commit. Need to add layer dependencies as well to the openpli layer in this case.
2 -create a bogus kodi-vuplus_18.bb which includes the main .bb. Ofc layer deps should be added.
What exactly is the issue with this?
It only removes bbappend capability from the BSP, which is indeed a good thing, we don't want a BSP appending to recipies outside the BSP.
So if kodi for VU+ requires something special, it needs to be addressed in the kodi recipes (there are already exceptions for VU+ present).
Nothing really forbids to have .bbappends in the BSP layers...in fact it is the standard in OE/Yocto for the kernels... [1]
Anyway the thing is that in an ideal world meta-openpli should not contain machine-specific recipes nor variables with machine-overrides (ie blah_vuduo2).
Ideally it should not even contain a kodi.bb but just a .bbappend pointing to the meta-kodi layer...
So that kodi_18.inc should not exist there
my 2 cents
A.A.
[1] https://www.yoctopro...html#bsp-layers
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #29
Posted 27 April 2021 - 12:36
I know it is not forbidden, the problem is that they may alter recipes from elsewhere. For the rest, I completely agree with you that all hardware linked recipes should be in the BSP.
It is different when, like OE-A, one controls everything, and one can setup the correct structure from scratch. With BSP's not being under our control, it is always going to be difficult.
Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Ultimate (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)
Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.
Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #30
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #31
Posted 27 April 2021 - 14:42
Where is that? I don't think that has any effect if systemd isn't used, a lot of recipe's have systemd support.
Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Ultimate (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)
Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.
Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #32
Posted 27 April 2021 - 14:50
It should not harm.
It's here
https://github.com/O.../kodi_18.bb#L14
Instead, more relevant is perhaps pulseaudio?
https://github.com/o...kodi_18.bb#L142
I don't see special reasons for it but maybe there are...
Cheers
A.A.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #33
Posted 28 April 2021 - 10:40
While the OE-A image is unbuildable atm (samba) I installed OpenSPA and immediately installed kodi on it.
Here the logs: https://pastebin.com/PxY4yPbq
BTW we have different directfb versions
WIP
A.A.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #34
Posted 28 April 2021 - 12:32
Your last change produced an error in the nightly builds for all Zgemma ARM models (H7 and up):
2021-04-28 11:05:14 ERROR: kodi-1_18.9+gitrAUTOINC+0655c2c718-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: /usr/lib/kodi/kodi-stb contained in package kodi requires libEGL.so, but no providers found in RDEPENDS_kodi? [file-rdeps] 2021-04-28 11:05:14 ERROR: kodi-1_18.9+gitrAUTOINC+0655c2c718-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: /usr/lib/kodi/kodi-stb contained in package kodi requires libGLESv2.so, but no providers found in RDEPENDS_kodi? [file-rdeps] 2021-04-28 11:05:14 ERROR: kodi-1_18.9+gitrAUTOINC+0655c2c718-r0 do_package_qa: QA run found fatal errors. Please consider fixing them. 2021-04-28 11:05:14 ERROR: Logfile of failure stored in: /openpli/oe/develop/build/tmp/work/h10-oe-linux-gnueabi/kodi/1_18.9+gitrAUTOINC+0655c2c718-r0/temp/log.do_package_qa.27315 2021-04-28 11:05:14 ERROR: Task (/openpli/oe/develop/meta-openpli/recipes-mediacenter/kodi/kodi_18.bb:do_package_qa) failed with exit code '1'
Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Ultimate (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)
Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.
Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #35
Posted 28 April 2021 - 12:51
Ah, ok,
probably they have PRIVATE_LIBS ot there isn't the rprovider.
Vuplus seems fixed but if you want we can readd the INSANE_SKIP but limiting it to the affected machines.
Something like INSANE_SKIP_${PN}_Zgemma-model
A.A.
Edit: it does provide the rdepended libs. No private libs.
https://github.com/z...ddriver.inc#L11
zgemma-v3ddriver-h7 should be added to _zgemma-model rdeps of kodi then.
Edited by A.A., 28 April 2021 - 13:00.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #36
Posted 28 April 2021 - 13:00
The machines failing are: h7, h9, h10, h11, h9se, h9combo, h9combose, i55se, i55plus
Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Ultimate (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)
Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.
Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #37
Posted 28 April 2021 - 13:23
h7 -> "zgemma-v3ddriver-${MACHINE}"
h9, h9se, h9combo, h9combose, h10, i55se, i55seplus -> "zgemma-mali-3798mv200"
h11 -> "zgemma-mali-3798mv310"
AFAIS we should add that BSP-derived stuff to kodi_18.inc
Cheers
A.A.
P.S.
Sorry for the mess, I am building for vuduo2 only atm
Edited by A.A., 28 April 2021 - 13:26.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #38
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #39
Posted 28 April 2021 - 14:41
I don't know, I'm far from a bitbake expect...
If you want me to test something, let me know, I have a local build environment for the h9.
Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Ultimate (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)
Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.
Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.
Re: devel: kodi_18 vs mipsel #40
Posted 28 April 2021 - 15:21
Kodi has virtual/egl in depends and that should be enough for the buildsystem to register [1]
The problem seems to be with the recipe dlopen'ing at runtime or with the unversioned shlibs or when libs are declared private_libs: the conclusion is we need libEGL.so and libGLESv2.so
I think we could add more lines to kodi_18.inc for these Zgemma like:
#Zgemma
RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_h7 = " zgemma-v3ddriver-h7"
RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_h9 = " zgemma-mali-3798mv200"
RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_h9se = " zgemma-mali-3798mv200"
RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_h9combo = " zgemma-mali-3798mv200"
RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_h9combose = " zgemma-mali-3798mv200"
RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_h10 = " zgemma-mali-3798mv200"
RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_h11 = " zgemma-mali-3798mv310"
RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_i55se = " zgemma-mali-3798mv200"
RDEPENDS_${PN}_append_i55seplus = " zgemma-mali-3798mv200"
Or maybe adding a generic RDEPENDS_${PN}_append = " virtual/egl virtual/libgles2"
This would be one-liner but need some more thoughts...
A.A.
[1] https://www.yoctopro...me-dependencies
Edited by A.A., 28 April 2021 - 15:23.
4 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users