Re: [RFC] Allarch and packagegroup improvement proposal

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

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5377 bytes --]

On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 01:46:50PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> As some people are already painfully aware, the current way packagegroup
> and allarch interact with the sstate signatures is painful.
> 
> Some example problem cases:
> 
> * An allarch package of scripts with an interpretor dependency (e.g perl)
> 
> * A packagegroup with dependencies on something which is debian renamed 
>   e.g. build-essentials on libgmp 
> 
> 
> Currently, packagegroups default to allarch and have their sstate
> dependencies truncated. This means that when something like gmp
> rebuilds, it can change package name thanks to debian renaming but the
> packagegroup referencing the old name remains, causing image creation
> failures.
> 
> So the "obvious" fix is to stop truncating the dependencies? Well, that
> means that the allarch package is written out every time machine changes
> to a different arch.
> 
> So we need to make packagegroups PACKAGE_ARCH specific? Well, this still
> doesn't solve the problem of allarch packages having ever greater
> problems with things like dependencies on perl.

Well then maybe that allarch package with perl dependency shouldn't be
marked as allarch.

> An alternative solution I'm wondering about to address both issues is:
> 
> * the sstatesig packagegroup code for dependencies handling should only
> trigger for allarch 
> * we add a sanity test that checks if renaming has happened for
> packagegroup dependencies and warn if it has.
> 
> The trouble is the sstatesig code doesn't have the full data store, only
> a limited cross section so it can't check if PACKAGE_ARCH == all, only
> if the class is inherited. We therefore probably need to change
> packagegroup to do conditional class inclusion (which is possible with
> the modern code base at least). The use of the class can be tested from
> the sstatesig code and hence indicate allarch.
> 
> 
> For the second part, we could add something like:
> 
> +    if bb.data.inherits_class('packagegroup', d) and bb.data.inherits_class('allarch', d):    
> +        if set(deps) != set(new_depends):
> +            bb.warn("allarch packagegroup %s has renamed dependency %s" % (pkg, str(set(deps) ^ set(new_depends)))) 
> 
> to runtime_mapping_rename in package.bbclass which tells us which
> packagegroups need to move to be PACKAGE_ARCH. Unfortunately, a quick
> run of OE-Core shows:
> 
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-sdk has renamed dependency set(['libgomp', 'libgomp1'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-x11-base has renamed dependency set(['dbus-1', 'dbus'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-standalone-sdk-target has renamed dependency set(['libgcc1', 'libgcc-s-dev', 'libstdc++', 'libc6-dev', 'libgcc-dev', 'libgcc', 'libc6', 'eglibc-dbg', 'libc6-dbg', 'eglibc-dev', 'eglibc-thread-db', 'eglibc', 'libthread-db1', 'libstdc++6'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-standalone-sdk-target-dbg has renamed dependency set(['libgcc-s-dbg', 'eglibc-dbg', 'libc6-dbg', 'libgcc-dbg'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-standalone-sdk-target-dev has renamed dependency set(['libgcc-s-dev', 'libc6-dev', 'libgcc-dev', 'eglibc-dev'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-x11-sato-base has renamed dependency set(['libsdl-1.2-0', 'libsdl'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-x11-sato-base-dbg has renamed dependency set(['libsdl-dbg', 'libsdl-1.2-dbg'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-x11-sato-base-dev has renamed dependency set(['libsdl-dev', 'libsdl-1.2-dev'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-sdk has renamed dependency set(['libgomp', 'libgomp1'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-x11-base has renamed dependency set(['dbus-1', 'dbus'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-standalone-sdk-target has renamed dependency set(['libgcc1', 'libgcc-s-dev', 'libstdc++', 'libc6-dev', 'libgcc-dev', 'libgcc', 'libc6', 'eglibc-dbg', 'libc6-dbg', 'eglibc-dev', 'eglibc-thread-db', 'eglibc', 'libthread-db1', 'libstdc++6'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-x11-sato-base has renamed dependency set(['libsdl-1.2-0', 'libsdl'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-standalone-sdk-target-dbg has renamed dependency set(['libgcc-s-dbg', 'eglibc-dbg', 'libc6-dbg', 'libgcc-dbg'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-standalone-sdk-target-dev has renamed dependency set(['libgcc-s-dev', 'libc6-dev', 'libgcc-dev', 'eglibc-dev'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-buildessential has renamed dependency set(['libstdc++', 'libstdc++6'])
> WARNING: allarch packagegroup packagegroup-core-buildessential has renamed dependency set(['libstdc++', 'libstdc++6'])
> 
> so we do have the problem in a number of places.
> 
> Does anyone have any thoughts?

I'm in favor of removing default allarch and setting correct
PACKAGE_ARCH manually in the packagegroup recipes like we do elsewhere.

packagegroups are small and "rebuilt" quickly, so I don't mind
"building" them once per TUNE_PKGARCH or even once per MACHINE_ARCH like
we do for couple of them already.

I can even find few changes from me on ML which do exactly that.

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

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