Re: [PATCH] poky-tiny.conf: blacklist inappropriate image options

[Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>]

On 11/21/2012 08:12 AM, Constantin Musca wrote:
> On 11/21/2012 12:19 AM, Darren Hart wrote:
>> Hi Constantin,
>>
>> On 11/19/2012 04:39 AM, Constantin Musca wrote:
>>> Blacklist all images that aren't core-image-minimal-*
>>>
>> This needs a description as to what the problem is and why this change
>> is needed. Note that the bug is here for reference, but cannot be relied
>> upon to provide context. That is what the git log is for.
>>
>> I believe the core-image-rt image should also build, but I haven't tried
>> recently. trace-cmd might break that.
>>
>> What sort of error is the user presented with when trying to build one
>> of the blacklisted images?
>>
>> As I've stated in the bug, I'd be happier with an image whitelist than a
>> blacklist as it is hopelessly unmaintainable. Have we explored the
>> whitelist approach?
>>
>> Finally, please remember to CC the maintainer of the files you are
>> modifying when that information is obvious. It is also good practice to
>> CC the active bugzilla commenters when available.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Darren
>>
>>> [YOCTO #2565]
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Constantin Musca <constantinx.musca@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>   meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky-tiny.conf | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>>>   1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky-tiny.conf b/meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky-tiny.conf
>>> index d40748e..121534e 100644
>>> --- a/meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky-tiny.conf
>>> +++ b/meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky-tiny.conf
>>> @@ -120,3 +120,20 @@ MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS = ""
>>>   # will build perl in case this package is installed. Since we don't care about
>>>   # this script for the purposes of tiny, remove the dependency from here.
>>>   RDEPENDS_${PN}-mtrace_pn-eglibc = ""
>>> +
>>> +INHERIT_DISTRO += "blacklist"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[build-appliance-image] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-base] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-basic] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-clutter] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-gtk-directfb] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-lsb] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-lsb-dev] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-lsb-sdk] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-rt] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-rt-sdk] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-sato] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-sato-dev] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-sato-sdk] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[core-image-x11] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>> +PNBLACKLIST[qt4e-demo-image] = "not buildable with poky-tiny"
>>>
> Hi Darren,
> 
> I will come back with build errors for incompatible images as soon as I 
> test all the images using the poky-tiny distro. Do you agree with the 
> following whitelist approach?
> - create poky-tiny.bbclass in meta-yocto which will contain an anonymous 
> python function for checking whether a package is a whitelisted image
> - the whitelist variable (configurable from poky-tiny.conf) will be 
> called TINY_IMAGE_WHITELIST

I'd like to hear from Richard or Paul regarding the whitelist approach.
I don't think we should resort to something that is tiny-specific (such
as TINY_IMAGE_WHITELIST). This is something that should applicable to
any DISTRO, just as the PNBLACKLIST is.

The hard part, I think, is we only want it to apply to images, as we cannot
possibly list every package. Unfortunately, as far as I know, bitbake
doesn't really distinguish between package recipes and image recipes,
and nothing dictates that image recipes have a particular naming scheme.

Thanks,

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel