From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AE48615AB for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 13:37:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Nov 2013 06:34:21 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,535,1378882800"; d="scan'208";a="428274145" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.121.84]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Nov 2013 06:37:46 -0700 From: Paul Eggleton To: Martin Jansa Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 13:37:44 +0000 Message-ID: <3227290.SyHHWdF4KT@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.10.5 (Linux/3.8.0-31-generic; KDE/4.10.5; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: <1383307932-4041-1-git-send-email-Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> References: <1383307932-4041-1-git-send-email-Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] packagegroup.bbclass: Drop build-time dependencies X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 13:37:50 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi Martin, On Friday 01 November 2013 13:12:12 Martin Jansa wrote: > * RFC because: > packagegroup.bbclass inherits allarch and by default sets > PACKAGE_ARCH = "all", but then it has runtime-dependency on > TUNE_PKGARCH packages and different signatures, so instead > of setting INHIBIT_DEFAULT_DEPS in addition to inherit allarch > I would like to drop default allarch completely. The fix looks OK, but I don't think we should be going further and removing the inherit. To my mind, the question of dependencies comes down to whether or not the packagegroup output changes depending on TUNE_PKGARCH, which in the general case it should not do. If we need to do some optimisation to avoid the packagegroup recipe rebuilding when it shouldn't due to packages it "contains" changing, we can certainly look at that. > * drop virtual/kernel dependency from packagegroup-core-boot > because kernel isn't needed to build packagegroup and building > it doesn't influence if it's included in image or not. Yes, I agree this seems erroneous. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre