Re: [meta-webserver][PATCH 1/1] webmin: drop allarch

[Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2460 bytes --]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:28:07AM +0200, Anders Darander wrote:
> * Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> [140625 09:46]:
> 
> > On Tuesday 24 June 2014 09:54:12 Anders Darander wrote:
> > > * runtime dependencies are TUNE_PKGARCH causing do_package_write_*
> > >   task to have different signature for MACHINEs with different
> > >   TUNE_PKGARCH
> 
> > > -inherit allarch perlnative update-rc.d
> > > +inherit perlnative update-rc.d
> 
> > So apart from me being reticent to make this change at all (for reasons that 
> > we've discussed before), 
> 
> Yes, I'm well aware of those discussions. I was actually thinking about
> CC:ing you on my reply to Martin, after he suggested something like this
> change.
> 
> > there is another issue - allarch.bbclass does more than just setting
> > PACKAGE_ARCH, it also disables certain other functionality such as
> > debug symbol splitting which is superfluous for these kinds of
> > recipes; in my testing when I originally wrote the webmin recipe this
> > significantly reduced the time required to build the recipe. We can't
> > just drop this inherit without regard to that. (I'm sure the same
> > applies elsewhere, it's just that the size of webmin makes the impact
> > significant.)
> 
> I'm all for saving time! (And I'm not personally concerned by this
> issue, as I'm currently only using webmin in a build tree for a signle
> machine).

you can probably use allarch and assign
PACKAGE_ARCH = "${TUNE_PKGARCH}"
I don't remember how many savings will be disabled by this combination.

For multimachine builds these savings could be worse, because better to
spend a bit more time building everything just once per TUNE_PKGARCH and
don't touch it again (until the signature is changed) than keeping it
allarch, but still building it once per TUNE_PKGARCH (because of different
signature and then unpacking it from sstate *every-single-time* you're
building image for different MACHINE (so even without any change to
webmin recipe).

> Though, to get back to Martin Jansa's issue; if there isn't already an
> enhancment request file to the Yocto bugzilla, maybe it's time to file
> one regarding the possibillity of having an allarch package
> RDEPENDS/RRECOMMNEND a package with an ARCH or MACHINE tune...
 
There is one already:
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5970

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]