From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 5E1BAE00C02; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 05:01:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: Received: from astoria.ccjclearline.com (astoria.ccjclearline.com [64.235.106.9]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 809ABE00BDE for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 05:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [69.196.158.250] (port=47291 helo=crashcourse.ca) by astoria.ccjclearline.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Wws4d-0001Fc-Ox for yocto@yoctoproject.org; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 08:01:11 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:57:37 -0400 (EDT) From: "Robert P. J. Day" X-X-Sender: rpjday@localhost To: Yocto discussion list Message-ID: User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LFD 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - astoria.ccjclearline.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - yoctoproject.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - crashcourse.ca X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Subject: [OT?] some inconsistencies in listing required build software X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:01:29 -0000 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII not sure if this is the right list (oe/poky/yocto?), but since it involves yocto docs, i'll ask here. there seem to be some (admittedly minor) inconsistencies in both the docs and code for checking the sanity of a build environment (i'm basing this off the current yocto docs and the current poky master branch). first, over at the QS guide: http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/latest/yocto-project-qs/yocto-project-qs.html there are, of course, the list of required packages for the common distros, and these lists refer to *packages* to be installed. this is fine, but the wording suggests that the developer is responsible for manually installing them, without mentioning that yocto itself will help them out later with the sanity checking. i think that's useful to know, but there's more. over in meta/conf/bitbake.conf, there is what i assume is the default list of ASSUME_PROVIDED commands: ASSUME_PROVIDED = "\ bzip2-native \ chrpath-native \ git-native \ grep-native \ diffstat-native \ patch-native \ perl-native-runtime \ python-native-runtime \ tar-native \ virtual/libintl-native \ texinfo-native\ " # gzip-native should be listed above? so the first question is, given that the QS guide suggests gzip is a *required* package (see fedora and centos package lists), why *isn't* gzip part of ASSUME_PROVIDED above? it seems that the QS packages list and the above should match, no? finally, over in meta/classes/sanity.bbclass, there's: # # Sanity check the users setup for common misconfigurations # SANITY_REQUIRED_UTILITIES ?= "patch diffstat makeinfo git bzip2 tar \ gzip gawk chrpath wget cpio perl" silly question -- is this list supposed to represent the utilities that must be on the machine *before* any OE processing is done? because, again , there seems to be an inconsistency in that this seems to require gzip, while ASSUME_PROVIDED doesn't mention it. it also doesn't mention unzip, which the QS packages lists refer to as required. none of this is a big deal, of course, but it would be nice if it were consistent. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ========================================================================