Host dependency vs. -native packages balance

Host dependency vs. -native packages balance

[Esben Haabendal]

Hi

Not having looked at the details of this bug, it seems like a good
example of how more host dependency creep into OE.

I think it raises two questions:

1. Where do we want the balance between dependency on host installed
libraries and tools vs. OE provided -native packages?

2. How can we better handle or track the actual host dependency of
current OE?

The current situation is that some (maybe even most) host dependencies
are discussed on the RequiredSoftware  and OEandYourDistro pages. They
are clearly not up-to-date and comments in bugzilla such as the one
below are a bit harder to find.

/Esben

On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 14:40 -0800, bugzilla-daemon@tinman.treke.net
wrote:
> http://bugs.openembedded.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3085
> 
> 
> Junqian Gordon Xu <xjqian@gmail.com> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>              Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
>          Resolution|                            |WORKSFORME
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- Comment #4 from Junqian Gordon Xu <xjqian@gmail.com>  2007-11-19 14:40:08 ---
> Confirmed that installing gfortran or the old g77 on the host solves this.
> Close as WFM.
> 
> 
-- 
Esben Haabendal
Embedded Software Consultant, Dore Development ApS
Phone: +45 5192 5393  Email: eha@doredevelopment.dk

Re: Host dependency vs. -native packages balance

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 07:36 +0100, Esben Haabendal wrote:
> Not having looked at the details of this bug, it seems like a good
> example of how more host dependency creep into OE.
> 
> I think it raises two questions:
> 
> 1. Where do we want the balance between dependency on host installed
> libraries and tools vs. OE provided -native packages?
> 
> 2. How can we better handle or track the actual host dependency of
> current OE?
> 
> The current situation is that some (maybe even most) host dependencies
> are discussed on the RequiredSoftware  and OEandYourDistro pages. They
> are clearly not up-to-date and comments in bugzilla such as the one
> below are a bit harder to find.

Dependencies needed from the host system are those listed in
ASSUME_PROVIDED. If its not listed in ASSUME_PROVIDED, OE shouldn't need
it. If it needs something not listed, that is a bug.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: Host dependency vs. -native packages balance

[Esben Haabendal]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:46:53 +0000, Richard Purdie <rpurdie@rpsys.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 07:36 +0100, Esben Haabendal wrote:
>> Not having looked at the details of this bug, it seems like a good
>> example of how more host dependency creep into OE.
>>
>> I think it raises two questions:
>>
>> 1. Where do we want the balance between dependency on host installed
>> libraries and tools vs. OE provided -native packages?
>>
>> 2. How can we better handle or track the actual host dependency of
>> current OE?
>>
>> The current situation is that some (maybe even most) host dependencies
>> are discussed on the RequiredSoftware  and OEandYourDistro pages. They
>> are clearly not up-to-date and comments in bugzilla such as the one
>> below are a bit harder to find.
> 
> Dependencies needed from the host system are those listed in
> ASSUME_PROVIDED. If its not listed in ASSUME_PROVIDED, OE shouldn't need
> it. If it needs something not listed, that is a bug.

Why are we then closing bugs with arguments such as "just install XXX on your host"?

/Esben

Re: Host dependency vs. -native packages balance

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 12:18 +0100, Esben Haabendal wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:46:53 +0000, Richard Purdie <rpurdie@rpsys.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 07:36 +0100, Esben Haabendal wrote:
> >> Not having looked at the details of this bug, it seems like a good
> >> example of how more host dependency creep into OE.
> >>
> >> I think it raises two questions:
> >>
> >> 1. Where do we want the balance between dependency on host installed
> >> libraries and tools vs. OE provided -native packages?
> >>
> >> 2. How can we better handle or track the actual host dependency of
> >> current OE?
> >>
> >> The current situation is that some (maybe even most) host dependencies
> >> are discussed on the RequiredSoftware  and OEandYourDistro pages. They
> >> are clearly not up-to-date and comments in bugzilla such as the one
> >> below are a bit harder to find.
> > 
> > Dependencies needed from the host system are those listed in
> > ASSUME_PROVIDED. If its not listed in ASSUME_PROVIDED, OE shouldn't need
> > it. If it needs something not listed, that is a bug.
> 
> Why are we then closing bugs with arguments such as "just install XXX on your host"?

They shouldn't be being closed with that IMO...

Cheers,

Richard

Re: Host dependency vs. -native packages balance

[Junqian Gordon Xu]

On 11/20/2007 10:52 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 12:18 +0100, Esben Haabendal wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:46:53 +0000, Richard Purdie <rpurdie@rpsys.net> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 07:36 +0100, Esben Haabendal wrote:
>>>> Not having looked at the details of this bug, it seems like a good
>>>> example of how more host dependency creep into OE.
>>>>
>>>> I think it raises two questions:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Where do we want the balance between dependency on host installed
>>>> libraries and tools vs. OE provided -native packages?
>>>>
>>>> 2. How can we better handle or track the actual host dependency of
>>>> current OE?
>>>>
>>>> The current situation is that some (maybe even most) host dependencies
>>>> are discussed on the RequiredSoftware  and OEandYourDistro pages. They
>>>> are clearly not up-to-date and comments in bugzilla such as the one
>>>> below are a bit harder to find.
>>> Dependencies needed from the host system are those listed in
>>> ASSUME_PROVIDED. If its not listed in ASSUME_PROVIDED, OE shouldn't need
>>> it. If it needs something not listed, that is a bug.
>> Why are we then closing bugs with arguments such as "just install XXX on your host"?
> 
> They shouldn't be being closed with that IMO...

I apologize for closing that bug prematurely. I updated the 
OEandYourDistro->Debian/Ubuntu part in the wiki.

Gordon

Re: Host dependency vs. -native packages balance

[Esben Haabendal]

On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 04:26 -0600, Junqian Gordon Xu wrote:
> I apologize for closing that bug prematurely. I updated the 
> OEandYourDistro->Debian/Ubuntu part in the wiki.

It was only meant as an example. No pun intended!
-- 
Esben Haabendal
Embedded Software Consultant, Dore Development ApS
Phone: +45 5192 5393  Email: eha@doredevelopment.dk

Re: Host dependency vs. -native packages balance

[Paul Sokolovsky]

Hello Richard,

Tuesday, November 20, 2007, 11:46:53 AM, you wrote:

[]

> Dependencies needed from the host system are those listed in
> ASSUME_PROVIDED. If its not listed in ASSUME_PROVIDED, OE shouldn't need
> it. If it needs something not listed, that is a bug.

  Nice plan. So, I reformatted ASSUME_PROVIDED in bitbake.conf for
easier maintenance, and let's make sure it's up-to-date. And added
what I've spotted recently: linux-tp DEPENDS on bc-native for collie.

> Cheers,

> Richard

[]

-- 
Best regards,
 Paul                            mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com