From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66573C71153 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 19:45:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fllv0016.ext.ti.com (fllv0016.ext.ti.com [198.47.19.142]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.1132.1693251917629737294 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 12:45:18 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=fail reason="dkim: body hash did not verify" header.i=@ti.com header.s=ti-com-17Q1 header.b=prYViOuC; spf=pass (domain: ti.com, ip: 198.47.19.142, mailfrom: rs@ti.com) Received: from fllv0035.itg.ti.com ([10.64.41.0]) by fllv0016.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 37SJj9i3016018; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:45:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1693251909; bh=CgdRia0S1z+mLd+4qL6oSTPvYKxCUy3nPGMBjB3kL0Q=; h=Date:Subject:From:To:CC:References:In-Reply-To; b=prYViOuCNFu0bexBFU+yRjyseq5CCaXxUTRp6cP9rguN1r/cihA9QX5dTCePEFoCA sXGDiTEmWGW623HvUqRrPOiHRkfj2iBXWzCuRmc98VWduZW+SJO7MaPPe4oxquOPgW 4s86ubIfj/icZ1oylMZ7jzUEL/YT0u7iGXEtMRFc= Received: from DLEE112.ent.ti.com (dlee112.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.23]) by fllv0035.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 37SJj9QR036444 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:45:09 -0500 Received: from DLEE113.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.24) by DLEE112.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:45:09 -0500 Received: from fllv0039.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.19) by DLEE113.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:45:09 -0500 Received: from [128.247.81.144] (ileaxei01-snat2.itg.ti.com [10.180.69.6]) by fllv0039.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 37SJj94n040065; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:45:09 -0500 Message-ID: <76528db0-dba6-4e63-9477-e74f37c85fea@ti.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:45:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [oe][OE-core][Patch 0/1] Revert "bin_package.bbclass: Inhibit the default dependencies" Content-Language: en-US, en-US-large From: Randolph Sapp To: Max Krummenacher CC: Peter Kjellerstedt , "openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org" , Max Krummenacher References: <20230827080953.2005190-1-max.oss.09@gmail.com> <177F942FA4953D34.1521@lists.openembedded.org> <0dc0924a-587e-44f5-a264-b78a6f470412@ti.com> In-Reply-To: <0dc0924a-587e-44f5-a264-b78a6f470412@ti.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fllv0016.ext.ti.com id 37SJj9i3016018 List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 19:45:25 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/186845 On 8/28/23 11:22, Randolph Sapp wrote: > On 8/28/23 10:09, Max Krummenacher wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 5:01=E2=80=AFPM Max Krummenacher via >> lists.openembedded.org >> wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 11:23=E2=80=AFPM Peter Kjellerstedt >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Max Krummenacher >>>>> Sent: den 27 augusti 2023 10:10 >>>>> To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Peter Kjellerstedt >>>>> >>>>> Cc: Max Krummenacher ; Randolph Sapp >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [oe][OE-core][Patch 0/1] Revert "bin_package.bbclass:=20 >>>>> Inhibit the >>>>> default dependencies" >>>>> >>>>> From: Max Krummenacher >>>>> >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> With commit d1d09bd4d7 ("bin_package.bbclass: Inhibit the default >>>>> dependencies") applied I'm getting a lot of these errors, i.e. qa >>>>> does miss libc and compiler provided libs: >>>>> >>>>> ERROR: ti-img-rogue-umlibs-23.1.6404501-r2 do_package_qa: QA Issue: >>>>> /usr/lib/libusc.so.23.1.6404501 contained in package=20 >>>>> ti-img-rogue-umlibs >>>>> requires ld-linux-aarch64.so.1(GLIBC_2.17)(64bit), but no providers= =20 >>>>> found >>>>> in RDEPENDS:ti-img-rogue-umlibs? [file-rdeps] >>>>> ERROR: ti-img-rogue-umlibs-23.1.6404501-r2 do_package_qa: QA Issue: >>>>> /usr/lib/libusc.so.23.1.6404501 contained in package=20 >>>>> ti-img-rogue-umlibs >>>>> requires libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.17)(64bit), but no providers found in >>>>> RDEPENDS:ti-img-rogue-umlibs? [file-rdeps] >>>>> ERROR: ti-img-rogue-umlibs-23.1.6404501-r2 do_package_qa: QA Issue: >>>>> /usr/lib/libufwriter.so.23.1.6404501 contained in package=20 >>>>> ti-img-rogue- >>>>> umlibs requires libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.14)(64bit), but no=20 >>>>> providers >>>>> found in RDEPENDS:ti-img-rogue-umlibs? [file-rdeps] >>>>> >>>>> Reverting the commit makes the build pass, alternatively adding >>>>> to depends in the recipe which is using the bin_package class >>>>> fixes it too: >>>>> >>>>> DEPENDS +=3D " virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}compilerlibs virtual/libc" >>>>> >>>>> I'd prefer reverting removing the default dependencies over fixing >>>>> each of the recipes which do use the bin_package class to actually >>>>> install binaries running in the target user space. >>>>> >>>>> Any opinions? >>>> >>>> Bummer. I guess we will have to update our recipes individually >>>> instead. :( >>> >>> =C2=A0From the bugzilla entry [1] which added the feature and from th= e commit >>> adding the class [2] it looks to me that the class should simplify=20 >>> adding >>> binaries externally built for the target. >>> Having the users of the class having to add the used libc / compiler >>> shared objects to not trigger a qa warning seems really wrong to me. >>> >>> Additionally I don't see the advantage in not installing the base >>> dependencies. Doing anything usefull in a build would need to build >>> them anyway for some other recipe, so one would save creating a few >>> hard links. Do I miss something here? >>> >>> So IMHO a recipe which inherits the class and really does not like th= e >>> default dependencies should add the `INHIBIT_DEFAULT_DEPS =3D "1"`. >> >> Adding the missing links, sorry about that: >> [1] https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D1592 >> [2]=20 >> https://www.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-Septembe= r/067782.html >=20 > Thanks for bringing this to light Max. I have no opinion in this. I=20 > understand not wanting to implicitly depending on anything. After all,=20 > explicit is always nice for those that don't want to navigate the full=20 > include chain to figure out recipe dependencies. It's also nicer for a=20 > minimal build (though arguably not in this case because these are core=20 > packages we're depending on). >=20 > If this is going to be the standard moving forward please let me know s= o=20 > I can update this recipe accordingly. Scratch that, I have an opinion now. Removing hidden base package=20 dependencies that QA steps explicitly rely is a bad idea. Please revert=20 this.