Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

packages: make bhyve depend on acpi
AcceptedPublic

Authored by novel on Sat, Apr 18, 8:49 AM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
F154010839: D56498.id.diff
Sat, Apr 25, 10:47 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Apr 23, 11:14 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Wed, Apr 22, 4:47 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Wed, Apr 22, 4:27 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Apr 18, 3:23 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Apr 18, 1:32 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Apr 18, 1:32 PM

Details

Reviewers
ivy
Group Reviewers
bhyve
Summary

bhyve(8) needs iasl(8) to run, otherwise it fails with:

/bin/sh: /usr/sbin/iasl: not found
bhyve: BASL failed @ build_dsdt:484
    Failed to execute basl_compile(ctx, basl_fwrite_dsdt): Unknown
error: 32512
bhyve: BASL failed @ acpi_build:899
    Failed to execute build_dsdt(ctx): Unknown error: 32512
Assertion failed: (error == 0), function bhyve_init_platform_late, file
/home/pkgbuild/worktrees/main/usr.sbin/bhyve/amd64/bhyverun_machdep.c,
line 394.

Register the "acpi" package, which provides iasl(8), as a dependency for
bhyve.

Diff Detail

Repository
rG FreeBSD src repository
Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Tests Skipped
Build Status
Buildable 72319
Build 69202: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

novel requested review of this revision.Sat, Apr 18, 8:49 AM
markj added a subscriber: markj.

This is only a dependency on amd64, arm64 and riscv don't need this. But, I don't know if there's a way to express that.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Sat, Apr 18, 12:14 PM

This is only a dependency on amd64, arm64 and riscv don't need this. But, I don't know if there's a way to express that.

it will be possible to express this after D56087 lands. currently, it's not, UCL can't be conditional.

This revision now requires review to proceed.Sat, Apr 18, 12:16 PM

uh... sorry, i didn't mean to remove markj! i'm not sure how that happened.

But, I don't know if there's a way to express that.

I wasn't able to find a way to express that either, but as the acpi tools are available on arm64 (didn't check riscv), my though was it's better to pull extra (unnecessary) dependency on arm64 than crashing like that on amd64.
The approach in D56087 should allow to solve it better indeed.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Sat, Apr 25, 4:11 PM

you may want to test this with WITHOUT_ACPI=yes, as we shouldn't build the acpi package in that case and that might break the dependency--it will still build, but you won't be able to install the package.

In D56498#1297019, @ivy wrote:

you may want to test this with WITHOUT_ACPI=yes, as we shouldn't build the acpi package in that case and that might break the dependency--it will still build, but you won't be able to install the package.

I'll test it. I wonder if WITHOUT_ACPI should imply WITHOUT_BHYVE then on amd64.

that would be fine from the pkgbase side, as we'll automatically not build either package then.