Copy all files with given extension to output directory using CMake - copy

I've seen that I can use this command in order to copy a directory using cmake:
file(COPY "myDir" DESTINATION "myDestination")
(from this post)
My problem is that I don't want to copy all of myDir, but only the .h files that are in there. I've tried with
file(COPY "myDir/*.h" DESTINATION "myDestination")
but I obtain the following error:
CMake Error at CMakeLists.txt:23 (file):
file COPY cannot find
"/full/path/to/myDIR/*.h".
How can I filter the files that I want to copy to a destination folder?

I've found the solution by myself:
file(GLOB MY_PUBLIC_HEADERS
"myDir/*.h"
)
file(COPY ${MY_PUBLIC_HEADERS} DESTINATION myDestination)

this also works for me:
install(DIRECTORY "myDir/"
DESTINATION "myDestination"
FILES_MATCHING PATTERN "*.h" )

The alternative approach provided by jepessen does not take into account the fact that sometimes the number of files to be copied is too high. I encountered the issue when doing such thing (more than 110 files)
Due to a limitation on Windows on the number of characters (2047 or 8191) in a single command line, this approach may randomly fail depending on the number of headers that are in the folder. More info here https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/help/830473/command-prompt-cmd-exe-command-line-string-limitation
Here is my solution:
file(GLOB MY_HEADERS myDir/*.h)
foreach(CurrentHeaderFile IN LISTS MY_HEADERS)
add_custom_command(
TARGET MyTarget PRE_BUILD
COMMAND ${CMAKE_COMMAND} -E copy_if_different ${CurrentHeaderFile} ${myDestination}
COMMENT "Copying header: ${CurrentHeaderFile}")
endforeach()
This works like a charm on MacOS. However, if you have another target that depends on MyTarget and needs to use these headers, you may have some compile errors due to not found includes on Windows. Therefore you may want to prefer the following option that defines an intermediate target.
function (CopyFile ORIGINAL_TARGET FILE_PATH COPY_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY)
# Copy to the disk at build time so that when the header file changes, it is detected by the build system.
set(input ${FILE_PATH})
get_filename_component(file_name ${FILE_PATH} NAME)
set(output ${COPY_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY}/${file_name})
set(copyTarget ${ORIGINAL_TARGET}-${file_name})
add_custom_target(${copyTarget} DEPENDS ${output})
add_dependencies(${ORIGINAL_TARGET} ${copyTarget})
add_custom_command(
DEPENDS ${input}
OUTPUT ${output}
COMMAND ${CMAKE_COMMAND} -E copy_if_different ${input} ${output}
COMMENT "Copying file to ${output}."
)
endfunction ()
foreach(HeaderFile IN LISTS MY_HEADERS)
CopyFile(MyTarget ${HeaderFile} ${myDestination})
endforeach()
The downside indeed is that you end up with multiple target (one per copied file) but they should all end up together (alphabetically) since they start with the same prefix ORIGINAL_TARGET -> "MyTarget"

Related

how to get ${THISDIR} inside do_unpack_append in .bbappend file

I'm attempting to replace a file from another layer with a .bbappend file. My goal is to overwrite a specific configuration file with a customized one during the unpack stage.
In my .bbappend I'm attempting to append the do_unpack to copy a file from the same directory as the .bbappend file into the working directory ${WORKDIR} The problem is: When inside do_unpack_append, ${THISDIR} is returning the directory of the original .bb recipe, rather than the directory of .bbappend
Here's an example:
The original recipe resides in: meta-origLayer/recipe.bb
My *.bbappend resides in: meta-newLayer/recipe.bbappend
recipe.bbappend:
`FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}:"`
do_unpack_append(){
bb.build.exec_func('replace_file', d)
}
replace_file(){
cp -f ${THISDIR}/fileToBeReplaced ${WORKDIR}/fileToBeReplaced
echo ${THISDIR} > ${WORKDIR}/shouldContain_meta-newLayer
}
There are two issues with recipe.bbappend:
I would expect the file shouldContain_meta-newLayer to contain meta-newLayer, but instead it contains meta-origLayer.
I'd primarily like to understand why ${THISDIR} behaves differently when placed inside do_unpack_append() from when it is used for prepending FILESEXTRAPATHS
When running bitbake, the recipe fails, producing the following error:
cp: cannot stat '/fileToBeReplaced': No such file or directory
This error occurs because fileToBeReplaced resides in a subdirectory of meta-origLayer (i.e. meta-origLayer/machine1/fileToBeReplaced) and the .bbappend expects to find the file in /fileToBeReplaced
My Question. . .
I have assumed ${THISDIR} would behave consistently within the same .bbappend, but it doesn't appear to. What is the best way to reference meta-newLayer/fileToBeReplaced from within do_unpack_append()?
This *.bbappend correctly overwrites fileToBeReplaced in the working directory during the unpack task:
FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}:"
SRC_URI_append += " file://fileToBeReplaced "
SAVED_DIR := "${THISDIR}"
do_unpack_append(){
bb.build.exec_func('replace_file', d)
}
replace_file(){
cp -f ${SAVED_DIR}/fileToBeReplaced ${WORKDIR}/fileToBeReplaced
}
Thanks for the explanation between bbappend parsing and execution johannes-schaub-ltb

How can I get "HelloWorld - BitBake Style" working on a newer version of Yocto?

In the book "Embedded Linux Systems with the Yocto Project", Chapter 4 contains a sample called "HelloWorld - BitBake style". I encountered a bunch of problems trying to get the old example working against the "Sumo" release 2.5.
If you're like me, the first error you encountered following the book's instructions was that you copied across bitbake.conf and got:
ERROR: ParseError at /tmp/bbhello/conf/bitbake.conf:749: Could not include required file conf/abi_version.conf
And after copying over abi_version.conf as well, you kept finding more and more cross-connected files that needed to be moved, and then some relative-path errors after that... Is there a better way?
Here's a series of steps which can allow you to bitbake nano based on the book's instructions.
Unless otherwise specified, these samples and instructions are all based on the online copy of the book's code-samples. While convenient for copy-pasting, the online resource is not totally consistent with the printed copy, and contains at least one extra bug.
Initial workspace setup
This guide assumes that you're working with Yocto release 2.5 ("sumo"), installed into /tmp/poky, and that the build environment will go into /tmp/bbhello. If you don't the Poky tools+libraries already, the easiest way is to clone it with:
$ git clone -b sumo git://git.yoctoproject.org/poky.git /tmp/poky
Then you can initialize the workspace with:
$ source /tmp/poky/oe-init-build-env /tmp/bbhello/
If you start a new terminal window, you'll need to repeat the previous command which will get get your shell environment set up again, but it should not replace any of the files created inside the workspace from the first time.
Wiring up the defaults
The oe-init-build-env script should have just created these files for you:
bbhello/conf/local.conf
bbhello/conf/templateconf.cfg
bbhello/conf/bblayers.conf
Keep these, they supersede some of the book-instructions, meaning that you should not create or have the files:
bbhello/classes/base.bbclass
bbhello/conf/bitbake.conf
Similarly, do not overwrite bbhello/conf/bblayers.conf with the book's sample. Instead, edit it to add a single line pointing to your own meta-hello folder, ex:
BBLAYERS ?= " \
${TOPDIR}/meta-hello \
/tmp/poky/meta \
/tmp/poky/meta-poky \
/tmp/poky/meta-yocto-bsp \
"
Creating the layer and recipe
Go ahead and create the following files from the book-samples:
meta-hello/conf/layer.conf
meta-hello/recipes-editor/nano/nano.bb
We'll edit these files gradually as we hit errors.
Can't find recipe error
The error:
ERROR: BBFILE_PATTERN_hello not defined
It is caused by the book-website's bbhello/meta-hello/conf/layer.conf being internally inconsistent. It uses the collection-name "hello" but on the next two lines uses _test suffixes. Just change them to _hello to match:
# Set layer search pattern and priority
BBFILE_COLLECTIONS += "hello"
BBFILE_PATTERN_hello := "^${LAYERDIR}/"
BBFILE_PRIORITY_hello = "5"
Interestingly, this error is not present in the printed copy of the book.
No license error
The error:
ERROR: /tmp/bbhello/meta-hello/recipes-editor/nano/nano.bb: This recipe does not have the LICENSE field set (nano)
ERROR: Failed to parse recipe: /tmp/bbhello/meta-hello/recipes-editor/nano/nano.bb
Can be fixed by adding a license setting with one of the values that bitbake recognizes. In this case, add a line onto nano.bb of:
LICENSE="GPLv3"
Recipe parse error
ERROR: ExpansionError during parsing /tmp/bbhello/meta-hello/recipes-editor/nano/nano.bb
[...]
bb.data_smart.ExpansionError: Failure expanding variable PV_MAJOR, expression was ${#bb.data.getVar('PV',d,1).split('.')[0]} which triggered exception AttributeError: module 'bb.data' has no attribute 'getVar'
This is fixed by updating the special python commands being used in the recipe, because #bb.data was deprecated and is now removed. Instead, replace it with #d, ex:
PV_MAJOR = "${#d.getVar('PV',d,1).split('.')[0]}"
PV_MINOR = "${#d.getVar('PV',d,1).split('.')[1]}"
License checksum failure
ERROR: nano-2.2.6-r0 do_populate_lic: QA Issue: nano: Recipe file fetches files and does not have license file information (LIC_FILES_CHKSUM) [license-checksum]
This can be fixed by adding a directive to the recipe telling it what license-info-containing file to grab, and what checksum we expect it to have.
We can follow the way the recipe generates the SRC_URI, and modify it slightly to point at the COPYING file in the same web-directory. Add this line to nano.bb:
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "${SITE}/v${PV_MAJOR}.${PV_MINOR}/COPYING;md5=f27defe1e96c2e1ecd4e0c9be8967949"
The MD5 checksum in this case came from manually downloading and inspecting the matching file.
Done!
Now bitbake nano ought to work, and when it is complete you should see it built nano:
/tmp/bbhello $ find ./tmp/deploy/ -name "*nano*.rpm*"
./tmp/deploy/rpm/i586/nano-dbg-2.2.6-r0.i586.rpm
./tmp/deploy/rpm/i586/nano-dev-2.2.6-r0.i586.rpm
I have recently worked on that hands-on hello world project. As far as I am concerned, I think that the source code in the book contains some bugs. Below there is a list of suggested fixes:
Inheriting native class
In fact, when you build with bitbake that you got from poky, it builds only for the target, unless you mention in your recipe that you are building for the host machine (native). You can do the latter by adding this line at the end of your recipe:
inherit native
Adding license information
It is worth mentioning that the variable LICENSE is important to be set in any recipe, otherwise bitbake rises an error. In our case, we try to build the version 2.2.6 of the nano editor, its current license is GPLv3, hence it should be mentioned as follow:
LICENSE = "GPLv3"
Using os.system calls
As the book states, you cannot dereference metadata directly from a python function. Which means it is mandatory to access metadata through the d dictionary. Bellow, there is a suggestion for the do_unpack python function, you can use its concept to code the next tasks (do_configure, do_compile):
python do_unpack() {
workdir = d.getVar("WORKDIR", True)
dl_dir = d.getVar("DL_DIR", True)
p = d.getVar("P", True)
tarball_name = os.path.join(dl_dir, p+".tar.gz")
bb.plain("Unpacking tarball")
os.system("tar -x -C " + workdir + " -f " + tarball_name)
bb.plain("tarball unpacked successfully")
}
Launching the nano editor
After successfully building your nano editor package, you can find your nano executable in the following directory in case you are using Ubuntu (arch x86_64):
./tmp/work/x86_64-linux/nano/2.2.6-r0/src/nano
Should you have any comments or questions, Don't hesitate !

bitbake recipe - doing a simple copy of the image

I am attempting to write a recipe that would simple copy two files (MyfileA , MyfileB) to a specific directory when the overall image is built. This is what my directory structure looks like:
MyDir/MyRecipe.bb
MyDir/files/MyfileA
MyDir/files/MyfileB
I would like the two files to be copied to a folder in home (which would not exist initially hence the directories should be created)The folder lets say is called "Testfolder"
This is what my bitbake file looks like
DESCRIPTION = "Testing Bitbake file"
PR = "r0"
SRC_URI = "file://MyfileA \
file://MyfileB "
do_install() {
install -d MyfileA ~/TestFolder/
}
Kindly let me know if I am doing something wrong here?
When i run bitbake on this I get the following
The BBPATH variable is not set and bitbake did not find a conf/bblayers.conf file in the expected location.
Maybe you accidentally invoked bitbake from the wrong directory?
DEBUG: Removed the following variables from the environment: LANG, LS_COLORS, LESSCLOSE, XDG_RUNTIME_DIR, SHLVL, SSH_TTY, OLDPWD, LESSOPEN, SSH_CLIENT, MAIL, SSH_CONNECTION, XDG_SESSION_ID, _, BUILDDIR
Any help in this regard would be appreciated.
First of all, to create your own meta-layer, you should run command yocto-layer create MyRecipe in your Yocto Environment. This is to make sure that you have all the necessary element in your meta layer. Make sure to put the new meta-layer into conf/bblayers.conf
Creating HelloWorld Recipe Video can be found here
Second, to copy a file from one to another directories.
DESCRIPTION = "Testing Bitbake file"
SECTION = "TESTING"
LICENSE = "MIT"
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${COMMON_LICENSE_DIR}/MIT;md5=0835ade698e0bcf8506ecda2f7b4f302"
PR = "r0"
SRC_URI = "file://MyfileA \
file://MyfileB "
#specify where to get the files
S = "${WORKDIR}"
inherit allarch
#create the folder in target machine
#${D} is the directory of the target machine
#move the file from working directory to the target machine
do_install() {
install -d ${D}/TestFolder
install -m ${WORKDIR}/MyfileA ${D}/TestFolder
}
To get more in details, this is my understanding of how the files move around in Yocto.
You have a directory that stored metadata in /sourced/meta-mylayer/recipes-myRecipe/. In that directory, there would be a folder with the same name as the recipe. I.E. myRecipe/ myRecipe_001.bb.
You would store the files that are related to myRecipe.bb (usually it is a patch) in myRecipe/ so that SRC_URI will get into that myRecipe/ directory to grab files. I.E. myFileA, myFileB
Then, you specify the S. This is the location in the Build Directory where unpacked recipe source code resides. By that mean, myFileA and myFileB are moved/copied to there when myRecipe builds.
Usually, S is equal to ${WORKDIR}, this is equivalent to ${TMPDIR}/work/${MULTIMACH_TARGET_SYS}/${PN}/${EXTENDPE}${PV}-${PR}
The actual directory depends on several things:
TMPDIR: The top-level build output directory
MULTIMACH_TARGET_SYS: The target system identifier
PN: The recipe name
EXTENDPE: The epoch - (if PE is not specified, which is usually the case for most recipes, then EXTENDPE is blank)
PV: The recipe version
PR: The recipe revision
After that, we inherit allarch. This class is used for architecture independent recipes/data files (usually scripts).
Then, the last thing we have to do is copy the files.
${D} is the location in the Build Directory where components are installed by do_install task. This location defaults to ${WORKDIR}/image
${WORKDIR}/image can also be described as the / directory in the target system.
Go to ${D} directory and create a folder call TestFolder
Then, copy myFileA from ${WORKDIR} to the ${D}/TestFolder
P.S. Please add comment to fix. There might be mistaken information here, cause I learned all this by myself.

opkg install error - wfopen no such file or directory

I have followed instructions to create an .ipk file, the Packages.gz and host them on a web server as a repo. I have set the opkg.conf in my other VM to point to this repo. The other VM is able to update and list the contents of repositories successfully.
But, when I try to install, I get this message. Can you please describe why I am getting this and what needs to be changed?
Collected errors:
* wfopen: /etc/repo/d1/something.py: No such file or directory
* wfopen: /etc/repo/d1/something-else.py: No such file or directory
While creating the .ipk, I had created a folder named data that had a file structure as /etc/repo/d1/ with the file something.py stored at d1 location. I zipped that folder to data.tar.gz. And, then together with control.tar.gz and 'debian-binary`, I created the .ipk.
I followed instructions from here:
http://bitsum.com/creating_ipk_packages.htm
http://www.jumpnowtek.com/yocto/Managing-a-private-opkg-repository.html
http://www.jumpnowtek.com/yocto/Using-your-build-workstation-as-a-remote-package-repository.html
It is very likely that the directory called /etc/repo/d1/ does not exist on the target system. If you create the folder manually, and try installing again, it probably will not fail. I'm not sure how to force opkg to create the empty directory by itself :/
Update:
You can solve this problem using a preinst script. Just create the missing directories on it, like this:
#!/bin/sh
mkdir -p /etc/repo/d1/
# always return 0 if success
exit 0

Automake, generated source files and VPATH builds

I'm doing VPATH builds with automake. I'm now also using generated source, with SWIG. I've got rules in Makefile.am like:
dist_noinst_DATA = whatever.swig
whatever.cpp: whatever.swig
swig -c++ -php $^
Then the file gets used later:
myprogram_SOURCES = ... whatever.cpp
It works fine when $builddir == $srcdir. But when doing VPATH builds (e.g. mkdir build; cd build; ../configure; make), I get error messages about missing whatever.cpp.
Should generated source files go to $builddir or $srcdir? (I reckon probably $builddir.)
How should dependencies and rules be specified to put generated files in the right place?
Simple answer
You should assume that $srcdir is a read-only, so you must not write anything there.
So, your generated source-code will end up in $(builddir).
By default, autotool-generated Makefiles will only look for source-files in $srcdir, so you have to tell it to check $builddir as well. Adding the following to your Makefile.am should help:
VPATH = $(srcdir) $(builddir)
After that you might end up with a no rule to make target ... error, which you should be able to fix by updating your source-generating rule as in:
$(builddir)/whatever.cpp: whatever.swig
# ...
A better solution
You might notice that in your current setup, the release tarball (as created by make dist) will contain the whatever.cpp file as part of your sources, since you added this file to the myprogram_SOURCES.
If you don't want this (e.g. because it might mean that the build-process will really take the pregenerated file rather than generating it again), you might want to use something like the following.
It uses a wrapper source-file (whatever_includer.cpp) that simply includes the generated file, and it uses -I$(builddir) to then find the generated file.
Makefile.am:
dist_noinst_DATA = whatever.swig
whatever.cpp: whatever.swig
swig -c++ -php $^
whatever_includer.cpp: whatever.cpp
myprogram_SOURCES = ... whatever_includer.cpp
myprogram_CPPFLAGS = ... -I$(builddir)
clean-local::
rm -f $(builddir)/whatever.cpp
whatever_includer.cpp:
#include "whatever.cpp"
Usually, you want to keep $srcdir readonly, so that if for instance the source is distributed unpacked on a CDROM, you can still run /.../configure from some other part of the file-system.
However if you are using SWIG to generate source code for a wrapper library, you probably want to distribute that SWIG-generated code as well so that your users do not need to install SWIG to compile your code. Then you have indeed a choice: you can decide that the SWIG-generated code should end in $builddir (it's OK: make dist will collect it there and include it in the tarball), or you could decide to output SWIG-generated code in $srcdir since it is really a source from the point of view of the distributed package. An advantage of keeping it in $srcdir is that when make distcheck attempts to build your package from a read-only source directory, it will fail on any attempt to call SWIG to regenerate the wrapper source. If you have your wrapper source in $builddir, you might not notice you have some broken rule that cause SWIG to be run on the user's host; by generating in $srcdir you ensure that SWIG is not needed by your users.
So my preference is to output SWIG wrapper sources in $srcdir. My setup for Python wrappers looks as follows:
EXTRA_DIST = spot.i
python_PYTHON = $(srcdir)/spot.py # _PYTHON is distributed by default
pyexec_LTLIBRARIES = _spot.la
MAINTAINERCLEANFILES = $(srcdir)/spot_wrap.cxx $(srcdir)/spot.py
_spot_la_SOURCES = $(srcdir)/spot_wrap.cxx $(srcdir)/spot_wrap.h
_spot_la_LDFLAGS = -avoid-version -module
_spot_la_LIBADD = $(top_builddir)/src/libspot.la
$(srcdir)/spot_wrap.cxx: $(srcdir)/spot.i
$(SWIG) -c++ -python -I$(srcdir) -I$(top_srcdir)/src $(srcdir)/spot.i
# Handle the multi-file output of SWIG.
$(srcdir)/spot.py: $(srcdir)/spot.i
$(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) spot_wrap.cxx
Note that I use $(srcdir) for all targets, because of limitations of the VPATH feature on various flavors of make. My setup to deal with the multiple files output by SWIG could be improved, but as these rules are not run by users and it has never caused me any problem, I do not bother.