Re: [yocto] Any recommendation to make software layer Yocto Compatible?

["Jan-Simon Möller" <dl9pf@gmx.de>]

Hi Duy,

The recipe in question was done by the Instrument Cluster EG, we can work on 
this with the group (main contact Yamaguchi-san). They do meet every other 
monday. See: https://lists.automotivelinux.org/g/agl-dev-community/calendar 

We do exacly what Paul describes all the time in meta-agl to pass the yocto-
check-layer:

e.g.
https://git.automotivelinux.org/AGL/meta-agl/tree/meta-agl-core/recipes-core/
systemd/systemd_%25.bbappend
and
https://git.automotivelinux.org/AGL/meta-agl/tree/meta-agl-core/recipes-core/
systemd/systemd_aglcore.inc

The condition can be on DISTRO_FEATURES or other variables. We try not to 
overload the usage of DISTRO_FEATURES as a change there will trigger a reparse 
in a lot of locations and hence possibly rebuilds. Thus the use of 
AGL_FEATURES in above example for anything that is directly related to AGL and 
is not a DISTRO_FEATURE in yocto already. 

For dlt-daemon in your example, we have these options and recommendations:
a) use such a conditional include as shown above ... simple but it will not fix 
all the issues
b) use :append:<some_other_conditional>  only in .bbappend files
     (name says it all ;) )
    e.g. :append:aglcontainerguest
    or
    e.g.  :append:aglcontainerhost
    The 2nd condition / override is important here to pass the check.
    A simple :append  would triger
c) distill the recipe down to just the required changes & if possible upstream 
these (e.g. PACKAGECONFIG options) ... config file changes can also be added in 
a "dlt-daemon-conf" package and replace or amend the original files. This helps 
most.

a) will have immediate effect but only c) and b) will lower the workload mid-
term. 

A path forward would then be:
Upstream the PACKAGECONFIG bits . It might make sense to rework the package so 
there is a configuration sub-package that is replaceable by the user. Then most 
conf file changes are in a separate package and can be easily replaced by the 
user w/o even touching the main (binary) package. That is of importance for 
reproducible builds and binary feeds. 



Am Montag, 8. April 2024, 14:36:38 CEST schrieb Duy via 
lists.yoctoproject.org:
> Hi Richard,
> 
> Thanks for your response.
> Here is one of the recipe bbappend files I'm working on:
> meta-agl-ic-container/recipes-extended/dlt-daemon/dlt-daemon_%.bbappend ·
> master · Automotive Grade Linux / AGL / meta-agl-devel · GitLab (
> https://gitlab.com/automotivegradelinux/AGL/meta-agl-devel/-/blob/master/me
> ta-agl-ic-container/recipes-extended/dlt-daemon/dlt-daemon_%25.bbappend?ref_
> type=heads )
> meta-agl-ic-container/recipes-extended/dlt-daemon/dlt-daemon_%.bbappend ·
> master · Automotive Grade Linux / AGL / meta-agl-devel · GitLab (
> https://gitlab.com/automotivegradelinux/AGL/meta-agl-devel/-/blob/master/me
> ta-agl-ic-container/recipes-extended/dlt-daemon/dlt-daemon_%25.bbappend?ref_
> type=heads )
> 
> I think some configurations are better to be upstreaming, e.g: Adding new
> PACKAGES, adding new PACKAGECONFIG. It avoids adding too much to bbappend.
> If you have any idea, please share it.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Duy Dang