From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ea0-f180.google.com (mail-ea0-f180.google.com [209.85.215.180]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6738961223 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 14:04:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ea0-f180.google.com with SMTP id h10so1647958eaj.39 for ; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 07:04:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=l/25jpcIrP/bAb0kNCbmJ2Urj45Hm8N8ZhOcGzj7nPg=; b=pw8NsByLG3BX0nALNUY0aRAjDPjHQxPsji1UNHxTCQC7J/CPKW956M4mL3wOYrHGPk mimHsoI8C3yyhpRNanKEBKVvnwdGnmNizDczLOyx+bvFmrSps1sVonvhsn9NZvyPGDQ4 dXYLGiaa76zY56MxX41/ndFlXCcxDI6PDWrwXtiq7/evkTVr8F7v7iVIDBMFwnuGG5QN OGW79/7jzZJZ9WXtKWCpz2lYkBkStd+uJzGdTUZgDegd1WPyhedvsfsVJovSpgvUVWbR /Sx4xF8HhJEMXSHSZOrC+XGkfwzwbTYoBoBdRJ+jMDeHyFQbGhCgTuGZjTazOmIx6ETT 9feA== X-Received: by 10.14.9.72 with SMTP id 48mr14255282ees.42.1375711450146; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 07:04:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-62-24-80-145.net.upcbroadband.cz. [62.24.80.145]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id v41sm33504228eep.10.2013.08.05.07.04.09 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 05 Aug 2013 07:04:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 16:04:51 +0200 From: Martin Jansa To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Message-ID: <20130805140451.GD3280@jama> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: proper way to express dependencies from meta-oe to meta-gnome? X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 14:04:10 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 45590 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vN1VrOpIkjMGbM/7" Content-Disposition: inline --vN1VrOpIkjMGbM/7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 09:43:34AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >=20 > for the entertainment value, while building for the beaglebone > black, i did: >=20 > $ bitbake -c fetchall world >=20 > and got: >=20 > ERROR: Nothing RPROVIDES 'gvfs' (but > /home/rpjday/oe/dist/layers/meta-openembedded/meta-oe/recipes-support/tra= cker/tracker_0.14.2.bb > RDEPENDS on or otherwise requires it) > NOTE: Runtime target 'gvfs' is unbuildable, removing... > Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['gvfs'] > ERROR: Required build target 'tracker' has no buildable providers. > Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['tracker', 'gvfs'] >=20 > and it's easy enough to see that, yes, tracker RDEPENDS on gvfs, which > is defined in meta-gnome which is a layer i'm not including. >=20 > so what is the preferred way to resolve stuff like that? is one > simply supposed to *know* (or check) that tracker requires gvfs? or > read the diagnostics and adjust accordingly? >=20 > given that tracker's home page is at gnome.org, would it make more > sense for tracker to be part of meta-gnome instead of meta-oe? just > trying to understand how recipes are distributed among the layers. As nothing else in meta-oe depends on tracker, easiest way to resolve this is to move tracker to meta-gnome. With optional dependencies it's common to use PACKAGECONFIG and let people enable PACKAGECONFIG option only when they also have required layer. --=20 Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com --vN1VrOpIkjMGbM/7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlH/sQMACgkQN1Ujt2V2gBweFQCffDCOyU/sehbb2Y3HFbB+wOXF eEIAn1eTb0HttnRUkpESiWwRH8FWoE5t =k/av -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vN1VrOpIkjMGbM/7--