We've seen cases where the bitbake.sock file appears to disappear but the
server continues to hold bitbake.lock. The most likely explaination is
that some previous build directory was moved out the way, a server there
kept running, eventually exited and removed the sock file from the wrong
directory.
To guard against this, save the inode information for the sock file and check
it before deleting the file. The new code isn't entirely race free but should
guard against what is a rare but annoying potential issue.
(Bitbake rev: b02ebbffdae27e564450446bf84c4e98d094ee4a)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Log when the socket file already exists and is removed before
recreating a new socket.
Log when unlinking the socket file failed.
(Bitbake rev: cfd7c9899f988bab6d9fe7bbfbdb60603fb5ed34)
Signed-off-by: Frank de Brabander <debrabander@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
We're struggling to understand how bitbake.sock can sometimes disappear
in live builds when we can't see where it could have been deleted.
This causes connection failures to the server and failed builds.
Add some extra debugging around the server log and client retry
log messages to give more information for the next time this issue
occurs.
(Bitbake rev: 376a516dc8c96727fd042ada65f803013601ee2d)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
We keep seeing server issues where the lockfile is present but we can't
connect to it. Reuse the lockfile debugging code from the server to
dump better information to the console from the client side when we
run into this issue. Whilst not pretty, this might give us a chance
of being able to debug the problems further.
(Bitbake rev: 22685460b5ecb1aeb4ff3436088ecdacb43044d7)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The previous cleanups meant that when the cooker was started, profiling
was always disabled as configuration was sent to the server later and this
was too late to profile the main loop.
Pass the "profile" option over the server commandline so that we can
profile cooker itself again, the setting can now take effect early enough.
(Bitbake rev: c97c1f1c127ef3f8fbbd1b4e187ab58bfb0a73e5)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
I realised only the first logging message was being displayed in a given
parsing process. The reason turned out to be the UI handler failing
with a "pop from empty list". The default handler was then lost and
no further messages were processed.
Fix this by catching the exception correctly in the connection writer code.
(Bitbake rev: d3e64f64525187f1409531a0bd99df576e627f7f)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
In theory this should have been worked around but is still occurring. Add
it to the list of things to ignore when bitbake is shutting down.
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib64/python3.9/threading.py", line 973, in _bootstrap_inner
self.run()
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/oe-selftest-fedora/build/bitbake/lib/bb/server/process.py", line 698, in startCallbackHandler
event = self.reader.get()
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/oe-selftest-fedora/build/bitbake/lib/bb/server/process.py", line 722, in get
res = self.reader.recv_bytes()
File "/usr/lib64/python3.9/multiprocessing/connection.py", line 221, in recv_bytes
buf = self._recv_bytes(maxlength)
File "/usr/lib64/python3.9/multiprocessing/connection.py", line 426, in _recv_bytes
return self._recv(size)
File "/usr/lib64/python3.9/multiprocessing/connection.py", line 384, in _recv
chunk = read(handle, remaining)
TypeError: an integer is required (got type NoneType)'
(Bitbake rev: 7a28ac4fe478bee1e52e84412da9626495f9c6c7)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
We're seeing UI deadlocks occasionally and this is possibly due to the
use of a daemonic thread in the UI event queue processing. This thread
could terminate holding a threading Lock() which would cause issues
for the process when exitting.
Change the shutdown process to handle this more cleanly.
(Bitbake rev: f5ad8349a5dbff9824a89f5708cfd011d61888c9)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The open coded lock acquire/release in the UI event handler doesn't
cover the case an exception occurs and if one did, it could deadlock
the code. Switch to use 'with' statements which would handle this
possibility.
We have seen deadlocks in the UI at exit this so this removes a
possible cause.
(Bitbake rev: bd12792f28efd2f03510653ec947ebf961315272)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The python gc can trigger whilst we're holding the event stream lock
and when cleaning up objects, they can trigger warnings. This translates
into a new event which would then need the lock and we can deadlock.
Disable gc whilst we hold that lock to avoid this unfortunate and
problematic situation.
(Bitbake rev: 96a6303949cefd469bcf5ed250ff512271354357)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
If a parser process is terminated while holding a write lock, then it
will lead to a deadlock (see
https://docs.python.org/3/library/multiprocessing.html#multiprocessing.Process.terminate).
With SIGTERM, we don't want to terminate holding the lock. We also don't
want a SIGINT to cause a partial write to the event stream.
I tried using signal masks to avoid this but it doesn't work, see
https://bugs.python.org/issue47139
Instead, add a signal handler and catch the calls around the critical section.
We also need a thread lock to ensure other threads in the same process don't
handle the signal until all the threads are not in the lock.
(Bitbake rev: a40efaa5556a188dfe46c8d060adde37dc400dcd)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
This debug is useful but the cooker shutdown or post_serve() may have cleanup
left so run after those.
(Bitbake rev: 1463fc0448d1a6a7265806a4a8b165b610dfb43f)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Python scales badly when concatinating strings in loops. Most of these
references aren't problematic but at least one (in data.py) is probably
a performance issue as the issue is compounded as strings become large.
The way to handle this in python is to create lists which don't reconstruct
all the objects when appending to them. We may as well fix all the references
since it stops them being copy/pasted into something problematic in the future.
This patch was based on issues highligthted by a report from AWS Codeguru.
(Bitbake rev: d654139a833127b16274dca0ccbbab7e3bb33ed0)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Currently the code can just show nothing as the exception if there was a double
fault, which in this code path is quite likely. This leads to an error log
which effectively says "it failed" with no information about how.
Improve things so we get a nice verbose traceback left in the logs/output
which is preferable to no logs.
(Bitbake rev: e5782b71647d1eb6de53bde7bc4f6019a5589f21)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
If the client process never sends cooker data, the server timeout will
be 0.0, not None. This will prevent the server from exiting, as it is
waiting for a new client. In particular, the client will disconnect with
a bad "INHERIT" line, such as:
INHERIT += "this-class-does-not-exist"
Instead of checking explicitly for None, check for a false value, which
means either 0.0 or None.
(Bitbake rev: 13e2855bff6a6ead6dbd33c5be4b988aafcd4afa)
Signed-off-by: Joshua Watt <JPEWhacker@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
We've seen cases where an OOM error causes bitbake server to hang:
9171 02:21:09.127810 Command Completed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/qemux86/build/bitbake/bin/bitbake-server", line 51, in <module>
bb.server.process.execServer(lockfd, readypipeinfd, lockname, sockname, timeout, xmlrpcinterface)
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/qemux86/build/bitbake/lib/bb/server/process.py", line 550, in execServer
server.run()
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/qemux86/build/bitbake/lib/bb/server/process.py", line 108, in run
ret = self.main()
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/qemux86/build/bitbake/lib/bb/server/process.py", line 242, in main
ready = self.idle_commands(.1, fds)
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/qemux86/build/bitbake/lib/bb/server/process.py", line 370, in idle_commands
bb.event.fire(heartbeat, self.cooker.data)
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/qemux86/build/bitbake/lib/bb/event.py", line 216, in fire
fire_class_handlers(event, d)
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/qemux86/build/bitbake/lib/bb/event.py", line 123, in fire_class_handlers
execute_handler(name, handler, event, d)
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/qemux86/build/bitbake/lib/bb/event.py", line 93, in execute_handler
ret = handler(event)
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/qemux86/build/meta/classes/buildstats.bbclass", line 182, in defaultrun_buildstats
write_host_data(os.path.join(bsdir, "host_stats"), e, d, "interval")
File "/home/pokybuild/yocto-worker/qemux86/build/meta/classes/buildstats.bbclass", line 160, in write_host_data
output = subprocess.check_output(c.split(), stderr=subprocess.STDOUT, timeout=limit).decode('utf-8')
File "/usr/lib/python3.6/subprocess.py", line 356, in check_output
**kwargs).stdout
File "/usr/lib/python3.6/subprocess.py", line 423, in run
with Popen(*popenargs, **kwargs) as process:
File "/usr/lib/python3.6/subprocess.py", line 729, in __init__
restore_signals, start_new_session)
File "/usr/lib/python3.6/subprocess.py", line 1295, in _execute_child
restore_signals, start_new_session, preexec_fn)
OSError: [Errno 12] Cannot allocate memory
We need to wrap the calls in the same high level wrapper as idle function calls
and trigger an exit upon an unhandled exception.
(Bitbake rev: 74042b5b89d5a170013fc1a327ce3a6530fbf7d5)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
bitbake-server is spawned by process.py and passes the arguments it is
given to ProcessServer. There's some type confusion here:
bitbake-server is called with a string representation of the timeout,
which may be None. If the timeout is not set, pass 0 instead of None.
Inside bitbake-server a ProcessServer is created which expects the
timeout to be a float not a string, so always float() the value.
[ YOCTO #14350 ]
(Bitbake rev: c93ae1f861208f6d39fd15c84fbcd0e2b54331f5)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
There are autobuilder logs where the server commands are failing
but we have no debug info in the server log. Improve this to try and
understand what is failing.
(Bitbake rev: 04d3a79226c9ea448b22f4efbab33876a72c9bdb)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Its hard to tell from the server logs whether commands complete or not
(or how long they take). Add extra info to allow more debugging of
server timeouts.
(Bitbake rev: 56285ada585ec1481449522282b335bcb5a2671e)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Knowing which process printed which messages and the timestamp of the
message is useful for debugging, so add this. Ensure the log parsing
isn't affected by using search() instead of match().
(Bitbake rev: 1d043666710df1fa9d9586fd974c0371dd1514b0)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Showing "leftover process" messages when a new server has started and is being
used by some UI is horrible. Compare the PID data from the lockfile to
avoid this (and the ton of confusing log data it generates).
Also, move the time.sleep() call to be after the first lock attempt, which
reduces noise in the logs significantly.
(Bitbake rev: ce1897a31afb5a14997bc3d2f459b90d43eecb7d)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
lsof/fuser error if the file doesn't exist. It can be deleted by something
else so ignore this if it happens and loop.
(Bitbake rev: b100d22ce37b7548b50e59a71802bcc903acd6ea)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The cookerlog output goes to a file and its misleading to look at it and
not have it up to date with what the cooker is actually doing. Ensure
written data is flushed.
Ultimately this should be using python's logging but that is for another
day, we need simple fixes right now.
(Bitbake rev: d95c3dd2b8ac50423976a7baf0a51e9580871761)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The binary string printed into the output is ugly, parse this so the
linebreaks come out in the logs and make them much more readable (I
was misssing the information initially despite looking for it).
(Bitbake rev: c2dd8bb434d5738fedf9019651074b90affff3b2)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
With an invalid layer, the desired error output should be:
ERROR: The following layer directories do not exist:
ERROR: /this_path_does_not_exist
ERROR: Please check BBLAYERS in .../build-invalid-layer/conf/bblayers.conf
Instead we were met with a backtrace:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/scratch1/fray/xilinx/poky/bitbake/bin/bitbake", line 36, in <module>
cookerdata.CookerConfiguration()))
...
File "/scratch1/fray/xilinx/poky/bitbake/lib/bb/cookerdata.py", line 267, in parseBaseConfiguration
self.data = self.parseConfigurationFiles(self.prefiles, self.postfiles)
File "/scratch1/fray/xilinx/poky/bitbake/lib/bb/cookerdata.py", line 358, in parseConfigurationFiles
sys.exit(1)
SystemExit: 1
(Bitbake rev: 3a2503c785a5cd9dca0dc68c3aec31b4bec7684b)
Signed-off-by: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@kernel.crashing.org>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The new server startup code means exceptions can happen when we aren't
setup to show them to the user correctly, leading to ugly tracebacks.
Add in some special case handling of BBHandledException to at least
ensure that common case doesn't traceback and the user sees meaningful
output.
In the future, the logging setup can likely be improved, as can the way
runCommand handles exceptions, they all should likely become real
exceptions again on the UI side.
[YOCTO #14022]
[YOCTO #14033]
(Bitbake rev: 6059d0e77f60ddb679049bd34478f41b1ab7995d)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
I have a suspicion based on process traces that the flock() call is no
longer interrupted by SIGALRM and hence the timeout doesn't work. We
were relying on EINTR triggering around syscalls but python is likely
protecting us from that in modern versions.
Re-implement this code with a different mechanism which doesn't have
that potential issue.
(Bitbake rev: 8eb52afdfd4c3e6478d4f8cc56e99def3f1c924c)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Using sys.executable ensures we're using the same python binary for the server
as the client, which is probably advisable. "bitbake-server" is left as the process
name as its more distinctive in process listings.
(Bitbake rev: 387a339b330e8122a62a148249beb3f064dd4e3d)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Correctly import, and inherit functions, and variables.
Also fix some typos and remove some Python 2 code that isn't recognised.
(Bitbake rev: b0c807be5c2170c9481c1a04d4c11972135d7dc5)
Signed-off-by: Frazer Clews <frazerleslieclews@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Trying to have a new python process forked off an original doesn't work
out well and ends up having race issues. To avoid this, exec() a new
bitbake server process. This starts with a fresh python interpreter
and resolves various atexit and other multiprocessing issues once
and for all.
(Bitbake rev: 9501dd6fdd7a7c25cbfa4464cf881fcf8c049ce2)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Dump info into the logs if there are extra threads left at process exit
time.
(Bitbake rev: 1c9496797b753e67351bd5cb98ef2b8e9435d51e)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The first thing the UIs do is update the server config from the UI. We
can just rely upon that and start the server with a standard config,
removing the need to pass the confusing configuration object around
as well as configParams, which contains a similar copy of some of the
data.
This makes memory resident bitbake work the same way as the normal
mode, removing the opportunity for some class of bugs.
The xmlrpcinterface and server_timeout values are passed in at server
startup time now and there no longer a second option in the
configuration which is effective ignored once the server starts.
(Bitbake rev: 783a03330802e83c525c55522e3ee2a933bded3a)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The sock object isn't used client side so we can just created it in
the server process and save passing around the fd/object.
(Bitbake rev: ee5d2c92dcce89ccb701e028ffc6419eb315f5ce)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Currently we end up parsing the base configuration multiple times as
initially, the right settings haven't come from the UI. We can defer
this until later in startup using runCommand as a trigger.
The advantage to doing this is improved startup times and ultimately
we should be able to avoid the double parse of the base configuration.
(Bitbake rev: 3caa43b665604475d2c87ba505efb0b9fca9c2e9)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
There is the possibility data is being lost from the logfile due to
data buffering. Add in a couple of extra flush calls to ensure data
is being written out before the lock file is dropped.
Possible fix for [YOCTO #14000]?
(Bitbake rev: 596ea229a87d26a8e970c7ee77179519ad081fef)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Further cleanup, just pass these settings directly.
(Bitbake rev: ac2284357f1fc7044dac9c146fad218fc9906412)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Having the idle callbacks abstracted via the configuration object
makes no sense. Its like this for historical reasons from the
multiple server backends but we don't need this now so simplfy.
(Bitbake rev: e56c49717355c9493b07d5fc80981a95ad8a0ec8)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
We already call bb.daemonize.createDaemon() in BitBakeServer so the extra
multiprocessing.Process() appears to be totally unneeded and just an extra layer
of forking which confuses things. Remove it.
(Bitbake rev: d214e55c45f9733b3289138feec0ae3361a4a48b)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
UI control can happen via the xmlrpc connection. Account for this when timing
out UI connections. This was causing issues for toaster on systems where it
couldn't parse the metadata within the timeout.
(Bitbake rev: fa85a8263971c25e67fa3b421c686a90e46acd87)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
We're only meant to be doing UI connection timeouts on the first connection
but haveui changes for each connection. We need to add a specific variable
to track this correctly and get the intended behaviour.
(Bitbake rev: e7c387c2e2fb2cc3ca1dc9d2029362909c326d72)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Its bb.note or logger.info, this avoids a backtrace.
(Bitbake rev: 82c534ca1a1313de067b0d79c79857e89fa2764a)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
If server startup is broken for some reason (e.g. lockfile issues)
and no UI connection is made, the server will just sit inifinitely
waiting.
Add a timeout upon startup in the non-memory resident case so that
such infinite waits are avoided. In the memory resident case, the
server wouldn't have shut down in the first place or will timeout
according to configuration.
Since any race may mean the socket file is no longer present, ensure
the unlink doesn't fault upon exit, thus ensuring any hashequiv or
PRServ is removed from memory, allowing all processes to exit
cleanly in such scenarios.
(Bitbake rev: 39888b750df12478e8bdea6727cca112dce1df85)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
We're seeing rare occasional races on the autobuilder as if two server
processes have the lockfile at the same time. We need to be extremely
careful this does not happen.
I think there is a potential race in this shutdown code since we delete
the lockfile, then call unlockfile() which also tries to delete it.
This means we may remove a lock file now held by another process if we're
unlucky. Since unlockfile removes the lockfile when it can, just rely on
that and remove any possible race window.
An example cooker-deamonlog:
--- Starting bitbake server pid 2266 at 2020-07-11 06:17:18.210777 ---
Started bitbake server pid 2266
Entering server connection loop
Accepting [<socket.socket fd=20, family=AddressFamily.AF_UNIX, type=SocketKind.SOCK_STREAM, proto=0, laddr=bitbake.sock>] ([])
Processing Client
Connecting Client
Running command ['setFeatures', [2]]
Running command ['updateConfig', XXX]
Running command ['getVariable', 'BBINCLUDELOGS']
Running command ['getVariable', 'BBINCLUDELOGS_LINES']
Running command ['getSetVariable', 'BB_CONSOLELOG']
Running command ['getSetVariable', 'BB_LOGCONFIG']
Running command ['getUIHandlerNum']
Running command ['setEventMask', XXXX]
Running command ['getVariable', 'BB_DEFAULT_TASK']
Running command ['setConfig', 'cmd', 'build']
Running command ['getVariable', 'BBTARGETS']
Running command ['parseFiles']
--- Starting bitbake server pid 8252 at 2020-07-11 06:17:28.584514 ---
Started bitbake server pid 8252
--- Starting bitbake server pid 13278 at 2020-07-11 06:17:31.330635 ---
Started bitbake server pid 13278
Running command ['dataStoreConnectorCmd', 0, 'getVar', ('BBMULTICONFIG',), {}]
Running command ['getRecipes', '']
Running command ['clientComplete']
Processing Client
Disconnecting Client
No timeout, exiting.
Exiting
where it looks like there are two server processes running which should not be.
In that build there was a process left sitting in memory with its bitbake.sock file
missing but holding the lock (not sure why it wouldn't timeout/exit).
(Bitbake rev: e1a7c1821483031b224a1570bfe834da755219cc)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
We're running into this timeout on loaded autobuilders in situations
where things should otherwise succeed. Log a note in these
cases and continue to try for longer.
(Bitbake rev: e567743e70f426786ae54dcb5ab550748d9266e4)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The parseBaseConfiguration() raises bb.BBHandledException(), but
BitBakeServer() didn't handle it, so we always got unexpected exceptions when
there were errors. For example:
=== Case 1:
* Add "print "hello"' in base.bbclass' def oe_import() function
def oe_import(d):
print "hello"
[snip]
$ bitbake -p
ERROR: Unable to start bitbake server (None)
ERROR: Last 60 lines of server log for this session (/buildarea1/lyang1/test_hy/bitbake-cookerdaemon.log):
File "/buildarea1/lyang1/poky/meta/classes/base.bbclass", line 21
print "hello"
^
SyntaxError: Missing parentheses in call to 'print'
<The first exception>
During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:
<Tracebacks>
<The second exception>
During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:
<Tracebacks>
<The third exception>
During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:
<Tracebacks>
[snip]
Now it looks like:
$ bitbake -p
ERROR: Unable to start bitbake server (None)
ERROR: Server log for this session (/buildarea1/lyang1/test_hy/bitbake-cookerdaemon.log):
ERROR: Error in compiling python function in /buildarea1/lyang1/poky/meta/classes/base.bbclass, line 21:
The code lines resulting in this error were:
0001:def oe_import(d):
*** 0002: print "hello"
0003: import sys
0004:
0005: bbpath = d.getVar("BBPATH").split(":")
0006: sys.path[0:0] = [os.path.join(dir, "lib") for dir in bbpath]
SyntaxError: Missing parentheses in call to 'print' (base.bbclass, line 21)
=== Case 2:
* Add 'HOSTTOOLS += "hello"' to conf/local.conf:
$ bitbake -p
ERROR: Unable to start bitbake server (None)
ERROR: Server log for this session (/buildarea1/lyang1/test_hy/bitbake-cookerdaemon.log):
<Tracebacks>
[snip]
During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:
[snip]
<Tracebacks>
ERROR: The following required tools (as specified by HOSTTOOLS) appear to be unavailable in PATH, please install them in order to proceed:
hello
The error message is printed by bb.fatal() which raises bb.BBHandledException(),
but BitBakeServer() doesn't handle it, so we got it.
Now it looks like:
ERROR: Unable to start bitbake server (None)
ERROR: Server log for this session (/buildarea1/lyang1/test_hy/bitbake-cookerdaemon.log):
ERROR: The following required tools (as specified by HOSTTOOLS) appear to be unavailable in PATH, please install them in order to proceed:
hello
No unexpected exceptions anymore.
[YOCTO #13267]
(Bitbake rev: 6e6865e6371dbd31a136eae64cc5b1fa5f5bee33)
Signed-off-by: Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
