create-spdx: question about virtual/kernel dependency

create-spdx: question about virtual/kernel dependency

[Davide Gardenal]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 421 bytes --]

Greetings,

I'm currently having a problem with this ( https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/tree/meta/classes/create-spdx.bbclass?h=kirkstone#n38 ) dependency in create-spdx.bbclass.
When building Linux everything is fine but using FreeRTOS brakes the build because there is no "virtual/kernel" provided.
My question now is, is it really a necessary thing to have or not?

Thanks for the help,

Davide

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 494 bytes --]

Re: [OE-core] create-spdx: question about virtual/kernel dependency

[Richard Purdie]

On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 02:53 -0700, Davide Gardenal wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> I'm currently having a problem with this dependency in create-spdx.bbclass.
> When building Linux everything is fine but using FreeRTOS brakes the build
> because there is no "virtual/kernel" provided.
> My question now is, is it really a necessary thing to have or not?

It is ensuring the kernel license information is included even if the image
doesn't actually contain the kernel binary. You'd obviously want to ensure the
FreeRTOS kernel is accounted for in your license information but I'm not sure
the right dependency for that.

We could add some variable that FreeRTOS builds could use to mask that
dependency out?

Cheers,

Richard

Re: create-spdx: question about virtual/kernel dependency

[Davide Gardenal]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 202 bytes --]

Yes we could but I'm not sure if that dependency is needed in the first place.
Looking at the dependency graph I can see that other tasks depend upon it so could it be redundant to have it?

Davide

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 214 bytes --]

Re: [OE-core] create-spdx: question about virtual/kernel dependency

[Joshua Watt]

David,

It does seem like the line `do_image_complete[depends] =
"virtual/kernel:do_create_spdx"` doesn't need to be hardcoded; I
unfortunately don't remember why I added that. As a guess I would
imagine it was so that you can add items that aren't normally part of
an "image" (u-boot, kernel, etc.) to SPDX generation, in which case it
should probably at least be a variable that can be overridden. It's
also possible that line simply isn't useful at all since just creating
the SPDX for those recipes doesn't mean they will be in the final SPDX
generated tarball, and if they do we need some mechanism to
specifically add them which would cover adding the dependencies also.

TL; DR It seems likely it can be removed.

CC'd Saul Wold (who did most of the kernel SPDX generation) in case he
knows something I don't


On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 5:14 AM Davide Gardenal
<davidegarde2000@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yes we could but I'm not sure if that dependency is needed in the first place.
> Looking at the dependency graph I can see that other tasks depend upon it so could it be redundant to have it?
>
> Davide
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
> View/Reply Online (#164757): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/164757
> Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/90602531/3616693
> Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [JPEWhacker@gmail.com]
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>