why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  think i may have asked this once upon a time, but why, in
core-image.bbclass, is there the line:

  PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"

as i read it, package-management doesn't represent an actual package
group, but rather represents one of a number of IMAGE_FEATURES that
are processed explicitly in a .bbclass file, like "debug-tweaks" or
"read-only-rootfs". so what does the above line mean?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Paul Eggleton]

Hi Robert,

On Sunday 17 November 2013 04:19:19 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>   think i may have asked this once upon a time, but why, in
> core-image.bbclass, is there the line:
> 
>   PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"
> 
> as i read it, package-management doesn't represent an actual package
> group, but rather represents one of a number of IMAGE_FEATURES that
> are processed explicitly in a .bbclass file, like "debug-tweaks" or
> "read-only-rootfs". so what does the above line mean?

It's not a package group, but then neither are any of the things defined by 
PACKAGE_GROUP - that variable just specifies one or more packages to be 
installed when the specified item appears in IMAGE_FEATURES. Perhaps we should 
just rename the variable; it's a little more internal than some of the other 
variables we've renamed in the past.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Paul Eggleton wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> On Sunday 17 November 2013 04:19:19 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >   think i may have asked this once upon a time, but why, in
> > core-image.bbclass, is there the line:
> >
> >   PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"
> >
> > as i read it, package-management doesn't represent an actual
> > package group, but rather represents one of a number of
> > IMAGE_FEATURES that are processed explicitly in a .bbclass file,
> > like "debug-tweaks" or "read-only-rootfs". so what does the above
> > line mean?
>
> It's not a package group, but then neither are any of the things
> defined by PACKAGE_GROUP - that variable just specifies one or more
> packages to be installed when the specified item appears in
> IMAGE_FEATURES. Perhaps we should just rename the variable; it's a
> little more internal than some of the other variables we've renamed
> in the past.

  oh, i realize it's not a package group, my point was that that line
seems entirely superfluous since, as with things like "debug-tweaks"
and "read-only-rootfs", that "image feature" is processed explicitly
within image.bbclass:

# IMAGE_FEATURES may contain any available package group
IMAGE_FEATURES ?= ""
IMAGE_FEATURES[type] = "list"
IMAGE_FEATURES[validitems] += "debug-tweaks read-only-rootfs package-management"

# rootfs bootstrap install
ROOTFS_BOOTSTRAP_INSTALL = "${@base_contains("IMAGE_FEATURES", "package-management", "", "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE_BOOTSTRAP}",d)}"

  the simple solution would seem to be to just delete the line:

PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"

from core-image.bbclass since it's both unnecessary and misleading.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Paul Eggleton]

On Sunday 17 November 2013 06:30:01 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > On Sunday 17 November 2013 04:19:19 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > >   think i may have asked this once upon a time, but why, in
> > > 
> > > core-image.bbclass, is there the line:
> > >   PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"
> > > 
> > > as i read it, package-management doesn't represent an actual
> > > package group, but rather represents one of a number of
> > > IMAGE_FEATURES that are processed explicitly in a .bbclass file,
> > > like "debug-tweaks" or "read-only-rootfs". so what does the above
> > > line mean?
> > 
> > It's not a package group, but then neither are any of the things
> > defined by PACKAGE_GROUP - that variable just specifies one or more
> > packages to be installed when the specified item appears in
> > IMAGE_FEATURES. Perhaps we should just rename the variable; it's a
> > little more internal than some of the other variables we've renamed
> > in the past.
> 
>   oh, i realize it's not a package group, my point was that that line
> seems entirely superfluous since, as with things like "debug-tweaks"
> and "read-only-rootfs", that "image feature" is processed explicitly
> within image.bbclass:
> 
> # IMAGE_FEATURES may contain any available package group
> IMAGE_FEATURES ?= ""
> IMAGE_FEATURES[type] = "list"
> IMAGE_FEATURES[validitems] += "debug-tweaks read-only-rootfs
> package-management"
> 
> # rootfs bootstrap install
> ROOTFS_BOOTSTRAP_INSTALL = "${@base_contains("IMAGE_FEATURES",
> "package-management", "", "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE_BOOTSTRAP}",d)}"
> 
>   the simple solution would seem to be to just delete the line:
> 
> PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"
> 
> from core-image.bbclass since it's both unnecessary and misleading.

It's not unnecessary - how else does the actual package manager make it into 
the image when package-management is in IMAGE_FEATURES?

Now, this functionality should definitely be available from image.bbclass; this 
should get fixed with the rework I've proposed in the following bug:

https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5424

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Paul Eggleton wrote:

> On Sunday 17 November 2013 06:30:01 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > > On Sunday 17 November 2013 04:19:19 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > > >   think i may have asked this once upon a time, but why, in
> > > >
> > > > core-image.bbclass, is there the line:
> > > >   PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"
> > > >
> > > > as i read it, package-management doesn't represent an actual
> > > > package group, but rather represents one of a number of
> > > > IMAGE_FEATURES that are processed explicitly in a .bbclass file,
> > > > like "debug-tweaks" or "read-only-rootfs". so what does the above
> > > > line mean?
> > >
> > > It's not a package group, but then neither are any of the things
> > > defined by PACKAGE_GROUP - that variable just specifies one or more
> > > packages to be installed when the specified item appears in
> > > IMAGE_FEATURES. Perhaps we should just rename the variable; it's a
> > > little more internal than some of the other variables we've renamed
> > > in the past.
> >
> >   oh, i realize it's not a package group, my point was that that line
> > seems entirely superfluous since, as with things like "debug-tweaks"
> > and "read-only-rootfs", that "image feature" is processed explicitly
> > within image.bbclass:
> >
> > # IMAGE_FEATURES may contain any available package group
> > IMAGE_FEATURES ?= ""
> > IMAGE_FEATURES[type] = "list"
> > IMAGE_FEATURES[validitems] += "debug-tweaks read-only-rootfs
> > package-management"
> >
> > # rootfs bootstrap install
> > ROOTFS_BOOTSTRAP_INSTALL = "${@base_contains("IMAGE_FEATURES",
> > "package-management", "", "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE_BOOTSTRAP}",d)}"
> >
> >   the simple solution would seem to be to just delete the line:
> >
> > PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"
> >
> > from core-image.bbclass since it's both unnecessary and misleading.
>
> It's not unnecessary - how else does the actual package manager make
> it into the image when package-management is in IMAGE_FEATURES?
>
> Now, this functionality should definitely be available from
> image.bbclass; this should get fixed with the rework I've proposed
> in the following bug:
>
> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5424

  leaving aside the bug report, i am now hopelessly confused. are you
saying this line:

PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"

from core-image.bbclass is currently *necessary* to properly support
the image feature of "package-management" in core images? i don't see
how or why. using that logic, you'd also need lines of that form for
"read-only-rootfs" and "debug-tweaks", which certainly don't exist.

  are you sure you're answering the question i'm asking?

rday

p.s.  i just don't see how that line has any value based on a few
simple tests i ran. using dora to build for a beagle xm, i can display
some variables:

$ bb show -r core-image-base IMAGE_FEATURES
Parsing recipes..done.
IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks splash"
$ bb show -r core-image-base
EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES
Parsing recipes..done.
EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks"
$

which looks correct. now let's edit my local.conf and change:

EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES = "debug-tweaks"

to

EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES = "debug-tweaks package-management"

save, exit and verify:

$ bb show -r core-image-base IMAGE_FEATURES
Parsing recipes..done.
IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks splash package-management"
$ bb show -r core-image-base
EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES
Parsing recipes..done.
EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks package-management"

good. and now, let's edit core-image.bbclass and remove the line:

PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"

save, exit and test:

$ bb show -r core-image-base IMAGE_FEATURES
Parsing recipes..done.
IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks splash package-management"
$ bb show -r core-image-base
EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES
Parsing recipes..done.
EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks package-management"
$

  seems like the "package-management" image feature is being picked up
just fine.

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Chris Larson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2405 bytes --]

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 5:45 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>wrote:

>   leaving aside the bug report, i am now hopelessly confused. are you
> saying this line:
>
> PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"
>
> from core-image.bbclass is currently *necessary* to properly support
> the image feature of "package-management" in core images? i don't see
> how or why. using that logic, you'd also need lines of that form for
> "read-only-rootfs" and "debug-tweaks", which certainly don't exist.
>
>   are you sure you're answering the question i'm asking?
>
> rday
>
> p.s.  i just don't see how that line has any value based on a few
> simple tests i ran. using dora to build for a beagle xm, i can display
> some variables:
>
> $ bb show -r core-image-base IMAGE_FEATURES
> Parsing recipes..done.
> IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks splash"
> $ bb show -r core-image-base
> EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES
> Parsing recipes..done.
> EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks"
> $
>
> which looks correct. now let's edit my local.conf and change:
>
> EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES = "debug-tweaks"
>
> to
>
> EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES = "debug-tweaks package-management"
>
> save, exit and verify:
>
> $ bb show -r core-image-base IMAGE_FEATURES
> Parsing recipes..done.
> IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks splash package-management"
> $ bb show -r core-image-base
> EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES
> Parsing recipes..done.
> EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks package-management"
>
> good. and now, let's edit core-image.bbclass and remove the line:
>
> PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"
>
> save, exit and test:
>
> $ bb show -r core-image-base IMAGE_FEATURES
> Parsing recipes..done.
> IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks splash package-management"
> $ bb show -r core-image-base
> EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES
> Parsing recipes..done.
> EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks package-management"
> $
>
>   seems like the "package-management" image feature is being picked up
> just fine.
>

This test you did makes no sense. Of course it’s in IMAGE_FEATURES, you put
it there. What you didn’t check is whether ${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE} ended up
being installed in the image, which it won’t be.
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3070 bytes --]

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Robert P. J. Day]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 3118 bytes --]

On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Chris Larson wrote:

>
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 5:45 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>         leaving aside the bug report, i am now hopelessly confused. are you
>       saying this line:
>
>       PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"
>
>       from core-image.bbclass is currently *necessary* to properly support
>       the image feature of "package-management" in core images? i don't see
>       how or why. using that logic, you'd also need lines of that form for
>       "read-only-rootfs" and "debug-tweaks", which certainly don't exist.
>
>         are you sure you're answering the question i'm asking?
>
>       rday
>
>       p.s.  i just don't see how that line has any value based on a few
>       simple tests i ran. using dora to build for a beagle xm, i can display
>       some variables:
>
>       $ bb show -r core-image-base IMAGE_FEATURES
>       Parsing recipes..done.
>       IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks splash"
>       $ bb show -r core-image-base
>       EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES
>       Parsing recipes..done.
>       EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks"
>       $
>
>       which looks correct. now let's edit my local.conf and change:
>
>       EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES = "debug-tweaks"
>
>       to
>
>       EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES = "debug-tweaks package-management"
>
>       save, exit and verify:
>
>       $ bb show -r core-image-base IMAGE_FEATURES
>       Parsing recipes..done.
>       IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks splash package-management"
>       $ bb show -r core-image-base
>       EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES
>       Parsing recipes..done.
>       EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks package-management"
>
>       good. and now, let's edit core-image.bbclass and remove the line:
>
>       PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"
>
>       save, exit and test:
>
>       $ bb show -r core-image-base IMAGE_FEATURES
>       Parsing recipes..done.
>       IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks splash package-management"
>       $ bb show -r core-image-base
>       EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES
>       Parsing recipes..done.
>       EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES="debug-tweaks package-management"
>       $
>
>         seems like the "package-management" image feature is being picked up
>       just fine.
>
>
> This test you did makes no sense. Of course it’s in IMAGE_FEATURES,
> you put it there. What you didn’t check is whether
> ${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE} ended up being installed in the image, which it
> won’t be.

  ah, i think i see my misunderstanding, i will experiment further and
clarify it for myself, thanks.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Robert P. J. Day]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 2239 bytes --]

On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Chris Larson wrote:

... huge snip that i hope won't be necessary ...

> This test you did makes no sense. Of course it’s in IMAGE_FEATURES,
> you put it there. What you didn’t check is whether
> ${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE} ended up being installed in the image, which it
> won’t be.

  i think i see my basic and fatal misunderstanding, and if you can
tolerate one more post, i want to make sure i know what i did wrong as
i want to write this up and i want to be accurate.

  as i understood it (apparently incorrectly), IMAGE_FEATURES fell
into two categories:

  1) actual package groups, as defined in core-image.bbclass, as in:

PACKAGE_GROUP_x11 = "packagegroup-core-x11"
PACKAGE_GROUP_x11-base = "packagegroup-core-x11-base"
PACKAGE_GROUP_x11-sato = "packagegroup-core-x11-sato"

  2) non-package group values that were processed independently by
code in image.bbclass, such as "read-only-rootfs" or "debug-tweaks"

  what i *thought* was that each setting had to be one *or* the other,
but not both. so when i saw code in image.bbclass that was handling
the "package-management" IMAGE_FEATURE, i immediately assumed that
meant it couldn't *also* represent an actual package group. is that
where i went wrong?

  so, in this one case for the IMAGE FEATURE "package-management",
there is an actual package group defined as:

PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"

which represents the packages:

$ bb show -r core-image-base ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE
Parsing recipes..done.
# ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE=opkg opkg-collateral ${EXTRAOPKGCONFIG}
ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE="opkg opkg-collateral poky-feed-config-opkg"
$

but that feature *also* pulls in additional processing as it's defined
in image.bbclass.

  have i finally got it right?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Chris Larson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 814 bytes --]

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>wrote:

> $ bb show -r core-image-base ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE
> Parsing recipes..done.
> # ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE=opkg opkg-collateral ${EXTRAOPKGCONFIG}
> ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE="opkg opkg-collateral poky-feed-config-opkg"
> $
>
> but that feature *also* pulls in additional processing as it's defined
> in image.bbclass.
>

If you’re referring to the bootstrap bits, technically that doesn’t do
something when it’s included in image features, it does something when it’s
*not* included in image features — include ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE_BOOTSTRAP
instead of ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE.
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1192 bytes --]

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Robert P. J. Day]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1357 bytes --]

On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Chris Larson wrote:

>
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>       $ bb show -r core-image-base ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE
>       Parsing recipes..done.
>       # ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE=opkg opkg-collateral ${EXTRAOPKGCONFIG}
>       ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE="opkg opkg-collateral poky-feed-config-opkg"
>       $
>
>       but that feature *also* pulls in additional processing as it's defined
>       in image.bbclass.
>
>
> If you’re referring to the bootstrap bits, technically that doesn’t
> do something when it’s included in image features, it does something
> when it’s *not* included in image features — include
> ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE_BOOTSTRAP instead of ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE.

  ah, right ... but i did identify my earlier confusion, that
"package-management" is indeed a valid packagegroup, i just foolishly
didn't understand that. thanks.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Paul Eggleton]

Hi Robert,

On Sunday 17 November 2013 11:17:13 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Chris Larson wrote:
> 
> ... huge snip that i hope won't be necessary ...
> 
> > This test you did makes no sense. Of course it’s in IMAGE_FEATURES,
> > you put it there. What you didn’t check is whether
> > ${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE} ended up being installed in the image, which it
> > won’t be.
> 
>   i think i see my basic and fatal misunderstanding, and if you can
> tolerate one more post, i want to make sure i know what i did wrong as
> i want to write this up and i want to be accurate.
> 
>   as i understood it (apparently incorrectly), IMAGE_FEATURES fell
> into two categories:
> 
>   1) actual package groups, as defined in core-image.bbclass, as in:
> 
> PACKAGE_GROUP_x11 = "packagegroup-core-x11"
> PACKAGE_GROUP_x11-base = "packagegroup-core-x11-base"
> PACKAGE_GROUP_x11-sato = "packagegroup-core-x11-sato"

As I keep saying, these aren't package groups despite the name of the 
variable. Please stop calling them that. All they say is that if "x11" is 
present in IMAGE_FEATURES, bring in packagegroup-core-x11. The fact that these 
*do* point to actual package groups as packages is pretty much incidental.

>   2) non-package group values that were processed independently by
> code in image.bbclass, such as "read-only-rootfs" or "debug-tweaks"
> 
>   what i *thought* was that each setting had to be one *or* the other,
> but not both. so when i saw code in image.bbclass that was handling
> the "package-management" IMAGE_FEATURE, i immediately assumed that
> meant it couldn't *also* represent an actual package group. is that
> where i went wrong?
> 
>   so, in this one case for the IMAGE FEATURE "package-management",
> there is an actual package group defined as:
> 
> PACKAGE_GROUP_package-management = "${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE}"

Not a package group.

> which represents the packages:
> 
> $ bb show -r core-image-base ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE
> Parsing recipes..done.
> # ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE=opkg opkg-collateral ${EXTRAOPKGCONFIG}
> ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE="opkg opkg-collateral poky-feed-config-opkg"
> $
> 
> but that feature *also* pulls in additional processing as it's defined
> in image.bbclass.
> 
>   have i finally got it right?

In that there are several things at work dealing with the single "package-
management" item, yes.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: why is "package-management" defined as a PACKAGE_GROUP?

[Robert P. J. Day]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 2292 bytes --]

On Mon, 18 Nov 2013, Paul Eggleton wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> On Sunday 17 November 2013 11:17:13 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Chris Larson wrote:
> >
> > ... huge snip that i hope won't be necessary ...
> >
> > > This test you did makes no sense. Of course it’s in IMAGE_FEATURES,
> > > you put it there. What you didn’t check is whether
> > > ${ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE} ended up being installed in the image, which it
> > > won’t be.
> >
> >   i think i see my basic and fatal misunderstanding, and if you can
> > tolerate one more post, i want to make sure i know what i did wrong as
> > i want to write this up and i want to be accurate.
> >
> >   as i understood it (apparently incorrectly), IMAGE_FEATURES fell
> > into two categories:
> >
> >   1) actual package groups, as defined in core-image.bbclass, as in:
> >
> > PACKAGE_GROUP_x11 = "packagegroup-core-x11"
> > PACKAGE_GROUP_x11-base = "packagegroup-core-x11-base"
> > PACKAGE_GROUP_x11-sato = "packagegroup-core-x11-sato"
>
> As I keep saying, these aren't package groups despite the name of
> the variable. Please stop calling them that. All they say is that if
> "x11" is present in IMAGE_FEATURES, bring in packagegroup-core-x11.
> The fact that these *do* point to actual package groups as packages
> is pretty much incidental.

  yes, i think i finally figured it out, and it was that variable name
prefix "PACKAGE_GROUP" that kept throwing me. in fact, it might have
been clearer if the terminology used had been:

IMAGE_FEATURE_x11 = "... package list for feature x11 ..."
IMAGE_FEATURE_x11-base = "... package list for feature x11-base ..."

etc, etc. so it's finally sunk in that, no, there's nothing magic
about a "packagegroup", it's just a way of abbreviating a package list
corresponding to a value in IMAGE_FEATURES.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================