From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by mx1.pokylinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D5434C800BA for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 04:06:43 -0500 (CDT) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 May 2011 02:06:30 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,351,1301900400"; d="scan'208";a="206342" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.255.16.118]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 May 2011 02:06:29 -0700 From: Paul Eggleton Organization: Intel Corporation (UK) To: yocto@yoctoproject.org Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 10:06:28 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.38-8-generic-pae; KDE/4.6.2; i686; ; ) References: <201105031700.43005.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> <1305069620.2317.22.camel@scimitar> In-Reply-To: <1305069620.2317.22.camel@scimitar> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201105111006.28522.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> Subject: Re: RFC: Package exclusion X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 09:06:48 -0000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wednesday 11 May 2011 00:20:14 Joshua Lock wrote: > > * Check when calculating dependencies if anything is scheduled to be > > built that is on the blacklist - if any are, gather all of them up and > > then stop and list them in an error message along with reason and > > depchain for each one > > This sounds like overlap with a task Scott Garman is set to work on > (Error handling in bitbake), let's make sure you guys are collaborating > here. > http://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=542 I hadn't considered this - you may well be right. It depends on how Scott proposes to attack that particular problem, I will check with him. > > * Replace COMMERCIAL* with some more generic exclusion mechanism that > > allows the reason to be defined as part of the exclusion list? > > Sounds reasonable, care to elaborate? Something like: > > COMMERCIAL_LICENSE = "naughty packages from copyright hell" > PERL_PACKAGES = "packages I don't want to include because I dislike > Perl" > EXCLUDED_PATTERNS = "PERL_PACKAGES COMMERCIAL_LICENSE" More like: EXCLUDED_PACKAGES += "broken1,broken2:These packages are broken by design and not supported;" EXCLUDED_PACKAGES += "licenserequired,clickthru,special1:These packages require a special license agreement;" The example syntax is horrible but you get the idea. > > * As a helper for non-en_US users, fail on parse if user defines any of > > the *LICENSE* variables as *LICENCE*? (we definitely don't want the build > > to continue and just ignore this as the user might not realise what has > > happened) > > Darn tootin! I think you meant to say "hear hear!" or maybe even "good show!"... ;) Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre