Re: [PATCH] initramfs-framework: split setup-live and install-efi into separate recipes

[Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@intel.com>]

On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 09:46 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:35 AM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@intel.com>
> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 15:17 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 9:04 PM, California Sullivan
> > > <california.l.sullivan@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > Having these the initramfs-framework recipe
> > > > forced initramfs-framework
> > > > users to build several tools they didn't need, and made it more
> > > > difficult to declare the recipe as allarch.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes [YOCTO #12024].
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: California Sullivan <california.l.sullivan@intel
> > > > .com
> > > > > 
> > > 
> > > The patch should be based on the allarch patch I sent as it adds
> > > the
> > > dependencies on the whitelist. So you can also set them as
> > > allarch.
> > 
> > I would prefer to keep initramfs-framework-setup-live/install-efi
> > as
> > arch-specific and only make initramfs-framework itself allarch.
> > It's
> > just a gut feeling about the (minor) advantage of not having to
> > rebuild
> > these two small recipes vs. the additional complexity of the
> > layer.conf
> > and having to keep that up-to-date.
> 
> The recipe is a shell script and there is no reason to not make it
> allarch. The need to keep layer.conf up to date is minor as it is
> going to be need only when new dependencies are added. Not ofthen...

The need for that was already missed once, in the initial patch which
introduced "inherit allarch". I find it likely that whoever changes the
scripts in the future will also miss it, causing additional work for
those who then have to deal with the auto builder errors. At least add
a comment to the DEPENDS which explains that layer.conf needs to be
edited together with the recipe(s).

But that's just my opinion. If Richard and/or Ross aren't worried about
a too complex OE-core layer.conf, then that's fine with me too.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.