Re: [PATCH] qemu-native: depend on unfs-server-native

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 08:50 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 4 mei 2012, om 08:32 heeft Martin Jansa het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 08:13:06AM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >> 
> >> Op 3 mei 2012, om 13:51 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven:
> >> 
> >>> On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 13:39 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >>>> Op 3 mei 2012, om 13:24 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven:
> >>>>> The whole point with the qemu emulated machines is that you build them
> >>>>> and they work for new users easily and efficiently. I don't think
> >>>>> calling bitbake to build them and force the user into another wait is a
> >>>>> good usability model to be promoting.
> >>>> 
> >>>> OE-core should set the right example and teaching people that a global
> >>>> IMAGE_DEPENDS is OK is not the right example. Especially when it
> >>>> actually causes breakage, see below.
> >>>> If people insist that IMAGE_DEPENDS is the one and only way to provide
> >>>> the runqemu experience then at least put a big comment in the file
> >>>> saying why it's done and why people shouldn't be copy/pasting it into
> >>>> their layers.
> >>>> And an indiciation where the line is drawn would be nice as well, I
> >>>> can imagine that someone wants to add amazon EC2 support to runqemu
> >>>> and sends a patch to add the EC2 tools to IMAGE_DEPENDS.
> >>> 
> >>> I'm happy to see a comment. The line is quite clear, the documentation
> >>> associated with the qemu images, the quick start guide and other manuals
> >>> assume we build qemu-native and friends and for usability this is a
> >>> clear win. The manuals do not document EC2 and it is not something we
> >>> expect a new user to need to do easily. Running an extra "bitbake xxx"
> >>> or including an extra configuration file would be perfectly reasonable
> >>> for those usage scenarios.
> >>> 
> >>>>> I'm also slightly bemused that in previous discussions you've implied
> >>>>> build time is less relevant then functionality yet here you're taking
> >>>>> the opposite stance :).
> >>>> 
> >>>> I get build *failures* for the qemu machines because I don't have mesa
> >>>> and sdl installed on the autobuilder. But you are right, I do think
> >>>> build time is less relevant than functionality.
> >>> 
> >>> We should also consider setting up PACKAGECONFIG options in the qemu
> >>> recipe for these things so you can specify to build qemu-native without
> >>> sdl/gl easily. I appreciate that is going to be pretty nasty
> >>> implementation wise but I think it would help and in fact if someone
> >>> files the bug I'll mark it as a P1 for 1.3 since that does help
> >>> usability a lot.
> >> 
> >> #2402 and it's already going the WONTFIX way
> > 
> > #2407 ?
> 
> -ENOCOFFEE, sorry

I was wondering what remake had to do with this :). I've replied to the
bug, I don't think WONTFIX is appropriate in this case.

Cheers,

Richard