Re: [OE-core] [RFC PATCH] package_ipk/deb/rpm: Drop recursive do_build task dependencies

["Peter Kjellerstedt" <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org <openembedded-
> core@lists.openembedded.org> On Behalf Of Richard Purdie
> Sent: den 19 september 2021 13:03
> To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [RFC PATCH] package_ipk/deb/rpm: Drop recursive
> do_build task dependencies
> 
> On Sun, 2021-09-19 at 11:57 +0100, Richard Purdie via lists.openembedded.org
> wrote:
> > This is a controversial change which removes the recursive dependencies
> > from the do_build target of packaging tasks of recipes.
> >
> > Currently this means when you "bitbake <image>" or "bitbake <recipe>",
> > the packaging tasks run for all packaging backends enabled for all recipes
> > in the dependency chain. The same therefore then applies to images.
> >
> > We don't actually need that, it is a convinience thing. Removing it
> > massively simplifies the task graph and causes much fewer tasks to execute
> > in many common scenarios. It also means less sstate is fetched for
> > example when building an image.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
> > ---
> >  meta/classes/package_deb.bbclass | 2 --
> >  meta/classes/package_ipk.bbclass | 2 --
> >  meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass | 2 --
> >  3 files changed, 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/meta/classes/package_deb.bbclass b/meta/classes/package_deb.bbclass
> > index eca43e17876..8f0eadbcd2e 100644
> > --- a/meta/classes/package_deb.bbclass
> > +++ b/meta/classes/package_deb.bbclass
> > @@ -320,5 +320,3 @@ addtask package_write_deb after do_packagedata do_package
> >
> >  PACKAGEINDEXDEPS += "dpkg-native:do_populate_sysroot"
> >  PACKAGEINDEXDEPS += "apt-native:do_populate_sysroot"
> > -
> > -do_build[recrdeptask] += "do_package_write_deb"
> > diff --git a/meta/classes/package_ipk.bbclass b/meta/classes/package_ipk.bbclass
> > index c3b53854e8b..756744279e1 100644
> > --- a/meta/classes/package_ipk.bbclass
> > +++ b/meta/classes/package_ipk.bbclass
> > @@ -278,5 +278,3 @@ addtask package_write_ipk after do_packagedata do_package
> >
> >  PACKAGEINDEXDEPS += "opkg-utils-native:do_populate_sysroot"
> >  PACKAGEINDEXDEPS += "opkg-native:do_populate_sysroot"
> > -
> > -do_build[recrdeptask] += "do_package_write_ipk"
> > diff --git a/meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass b/meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass
> > index 88d861c0e75..9f415b234de 100644
> > --- a/meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass
> > +++ b/meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass
> > @@ -752,5 +752,3 @@ addtask package_write_rpm after do_packagedata do_package
> >
> >  PACKAGEINDEXDEPS += "rpm-native:do_populate_sysroot"
> >  PACKAGEINDEXDEPS += "createrepo-c-native:do_populate_sysroot"
> > -
> > -do_build[recrdeptask] += "do_package_write_rpm"
> 
> Just to add a bit more context to this, the bigger impact will be on CI setups
> including our autobuilder since "bitbake XXX" will no longer do quite what it
> did before. I'm starting to think we should move to the new behaviour and apapt
> the CI targets as/where needed.
> 
> I have a build running on the autobuilder to see what impact this has on the
> automated tests. I'd welcome other people's thoughts on this.
> 
> FWIW we have removed a lot of these recursive dependencies, this one is one of
> the few left on do_build but it has been left as it has the biggest user visible
> impact.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Richard

You write that this is a controversial change with big user visible impact.
At the same time you write that we do not need the removed dependencies.
What I don't see in your commit message, nor in the follow up mail, is _what_ 
the impact actually is. What will I no longer get when I run `bitbake <image>`?

//Peter