are there any more obvious candidates for ASSUME_PROVIDED?

are there any more obvious candidates for ASSUME_PROVIDED?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  asked about this once upon a time ... are there any other
possibilities for adding to ASSUME_PROVIDED in local.conf.sample,
given that there are surely more native utilities that are fairly safe
by now?

  for example, it's still weird that current default ASSUME_PROVIDED
includes bzip2 but not gzip, especially since the quick start guide:

https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/current/yocto-project-qs/yocto-project-qs.html

lists *both* of them as required on your build host.

  it also seems odd that that list includes git but not subversion.
anyway, you get the idea.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: are there any more obvious candidates for ASSUME_PROVIDED?

[Khem Raj]

On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 5:39 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>
>   asked about this once upon a time ... are there any other
> possibilities for adding to ASSUME_PROVIDED in local.conf.sample,
> given that there are surely more native utilities that are fairly safe
> by now?
>
>   for example, it's still weird that current default ASSUME_PROVIDED
> includes bzip2 but not gzip, especially since the quick start guide:
>
> https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/current/yocto-project-qs/yocto-project-qs.html
>
> lists *both* of them as required on your build host.
>
>   it also seems odd that that list includes git but not subversion.
> anyway, you get the idea.

may times utilities have bugs or undesired behavior for OE so this
list is dynamic and sometimes
not all distro carry a certain version which OE expects and there are
ABI/format changes as it happened between svn 1.6 and 1.7

>
> rday
>
> --
>
> ========================================================================
> Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
>                         http://crashcourse.ca
>
> Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
> LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
> ========================================================================
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: are there any more obvious candidates for ASSUME_PROVIDED?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Khem Raj wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 5:39 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >
> >   asked about this once upon a time ... are there any other
> > possibilities for adding to ASSUME_PROVIDED in local.conf.sample,
> > given that there are surely more native utilities that are fairly safe
> > by now?
> >
> >   for example, it's still weird that current default ASSUME_PROVIDED
> > includes bzip2 but not gzip, especially since the quick start guide:
> >
> > https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/current/yocto-project-qs/yocto-project-qs.html
> >
> > lists *both* of them as required on your build host.
> >
> >   it also seems odd that that list includes git but not subversion.
> > anyway, you get the idea.
>
> may times utilities have bugs or undesired behavior for OE so this
> list is dynamic and sometimes
> not all distro carry a certain version which OE expects and there are
> ABI/format changes as it happened between svn 1.6 and 1.7

  fair enough, but what about the simpler example of gzip as opposed
to bzip2? it's just trying to understand what makes the list and what
doesn't.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: are there any more obvious candidates for ASSUME_PROVIDED?

[Khem Raj]

On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>   fair enough, but what about the simpler example of gzip as opposed
> to bzip2? it's just trying to understand what makes the list and what
> doesn't.

gzip can be replaced by pigz and it can be used to provide gzip-native

Re: are there any more obvious candidates for ASSUME_PROVIDED?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Khem Raj wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >   fair enough, but what about the simpler example of gzip as opposed
> > to bzip2? it's just trying to understand what makes the list and what
> > doesn't.
>
> gzip can be replaced by pigz and it can be used to provide gzip-native

  ah, got it.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================