upgrading arm6hf

[Ian Lepore]

On Fri, 2016-05-20 at 16:16 -0700, bob prohaska wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 02:32:44PM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-05-19 at 23:59 -0700, bob prohaska wrote:
> > > Just did a reboot, uname -p reports
> > > root at www:~ # uname -p
> > > armv6hf
> > > 
> > 
> > FYI, this just got fixed with Warner's r300324 commit.  I think
> > only
> > your kernel needs rebuilding to make it right in userland too.
> > 
> > -- Ian
> > 
> Indeed, the kernel build completed with no special options, the
> install
> required DESTIR=/ but that's all. Will the DESTDIR requirement
> persist?
> 
> After reboot the system says it's at r300334M, uname -p reports
> armv6,
> not armv6hf as before; is this expected? World and userland are now
> very slightly out of sync, so the next step is to update and repeat
> a complete OS build/install cycle. A few minutes into the process all
> seems well.
> 
> Thank you very much!
> 
> bob prohaska

I'm not seeing any such problems, I can do a "make installkernel
KERNCONF=IMX6" without any destdir, and it works fine.  I've also got a
buildworld running on the wandboard right now without any problems (but
it will be a few hours to finish).

Oh wait... but your system *was* armv6hf, right?  I think you've got a
compiler and other tools that think the native arch is armv6hf, but now
with your updated kernel any tool that asks for sysctl hw.machine_arch
or uname -p will be told "armv6", mismatching the tools (even make
itself has a notion of the native arch, expressed in the MACHINE_ARCH
make variable).

This trouble didn'e didn't happen to me because my initial build and
install after the armv6hf->armv6 change were done as crossbuilds on an
amd64 machine.  I'm not sure what the proper update-in-place mechanism
is for this (and have even less idea right now how to get your current
frankensystem sane again).

-- Ian