"bitbake -c fetchall" doesn't process EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS

"bitbake -c fetchall" doesn't process EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS

[Robert P. J. Day]

  back in november, i whined thusly:

http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-November/031997.html

is this the *intended* behaviour?  since it seems that if i do a
"bitbake -c fetchall", i should expect that i now have *all* software
related to my target, and that's clearly not the case here.

rday

-- 

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

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

Re: "bitbake -c fetchall" doesn't process EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 04:41 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>   back in november, i whined thusly:
> 
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-November/031997.html
> 
> is this the *intended* behaviour?  since it seems that if i do a
> "bitbake -c fetchall", i should expect that i now have *all* software
> related to my target, and that's clearly not the case here.

Someone filed a bug in bugzilla about this. Bitbake is behaving as
intended and likely there is missing dependency information in the
fetchall case. This is a metadata level problem, not a bitbake one.

Patches naturally welcome to add the correct dependency information.

Cheers,

Richard