Re: Does recipe specific sysrooot (or whatelse in current oe) break native dependencies?

[Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1721 bytes --]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 04:24:15PM +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-02-13 at 15:36 +0100, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > Hi Andreas,
> > 
> > 
> > I think it's feature which was already there, but almost never
> > triggered (even in test-dependencies.sh tests), but with RSS it fails
> > reliably.
> > 
> > 
> > See:
> > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2016-July/124435.html
> 
> That's not quite the same, if I understand it correctly. In that email,
> Richard was talking about "dependencies of that target are not needed
> and not installed" and used "quilt-native" and "compiler/toolchain" as
> example. In other words, if recipe foo DEPENDS on bar for getting foo
> compiled, that dependency on bar gets ignored when installing "foo" into
> the recipe specific sysroot because it shouldn't be needed anymore.

I'm not sure if it's the same or not, but back then I got very rarely
missing dependency on wayland-native or qtwayland-native, now with RSS I
got 20-30 recipes failing because of missing dependency on
wayland-native, qtwayland-native or qtbase-native to stage the scanner,
moc and other native tools in recipe-sysroot-native.

And Andreas issues look similar to that.

> But the example here is a recipe foo which has a runtime dependency on
> bar, so bar must be installed in addition to foo, otherwise foo will not
> work.
> 
> This is where it gets tricky: do native recipes have RDEPENDS? They are
> not getting packaged, so I suppose not. One could collect all RDEPENDS_*
> values (regardless of the actual package), but that might be too broad
> (for example, when "packaging" the native recipe wouldn't even produce
> that package).

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 201 bytes --]