Hidden depenencies

Hidden depenencies

[Thomas Kunze]

Hi everybody,

I just spend some hours to figure out why a kernel module I added to
MACHINE_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS didn't show up in images. The solution is to
rebuild task-base. I think there should a way to handle this in oe. But
for now we should document such hidden dependencies. Where should this
be in the wiki? Do you know additional hidden dependencies?

My list so far:
MACHINE_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS -> task-base
module_autoload_* -> virtual/kernel

Regards,
Thomas

Re: Hidden depenencies

[Paul Sokolovsky]

Hello Thomas,

Saturday, January 26, 2008, 2:13:29 AM, you wrote:

> Hi everybody,

> I just spend some hours to figure out why a kernel module I added to
> MACHINE_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS didn't show up in images. The solution is to
> rebuild task-base.

  To be more exact/verbose, the solution is to bump task-base's PR.

> I think there should a way to handle this in oe.

  Yes, the explicit bumping of PR. Why this is the way to handle it in
OE becomes clear after trying to devise some other scheme. Of course,
some warning from bitbake's side would be nice (just as many other
things from bitbake's side).

> But
> for now we should document such hidden dependencies.

  It's more of indirect dependencies than hidden IMHO. It's not hidden
per se - looking at task-base.bb will immediately shows the fact that
it references MACHINE_EXTRA_*. And vice-versa, doing a
grep -r MACHINE_EXTRA on OE tree will show all its referents.

> Where should this
> be in the wiki? Do you know additional hidden dependencies?

> My list so far:
> MACHINE_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS -> task-base
module_autoload_* ->> virtual/kernel

   There's pretty developed manual for OE. It already has a section on
task-base, so that info should go there. The same for kernel.

> Regards,
> Thomas


[]

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