From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TgeIS-0004X6-Qa for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2012 17:27:37 +0100 Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Dec 2012 08:13:10 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,230,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="229883117" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.123.5]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Dec 2012 08:13:08 -0800 From: Paul Eggleton To: Richard Purdie Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 16:13:07 +0000 Message-ID: <3896317.iJW1Gi8Xv1@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.9.3 (Linux/3.5.0-19-generic; KDE/4.9.3; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: <1354807886.12928.9.camel@ted> References: <04747ce39a3fbbd538556c67247452b931a3ccc5.1354650148.git.mark.hatle@windriver.com> <1354807886.12928.9.camel@ted> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] classes/*_rpm: integrate Smart into RPM filesystem construction X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 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: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 16:27:37 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Thursday 06 December 2012 15:31:26 Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 13:49 -0600, Mark Hatle wrote: > > From: Paul Eggleton > > > > Use Smart to construct the root filesystem for images and the contents > > of SDKs rather than the custom scripts around rpm we had previously. > > This ensures the result when producing an updated image will be the > > same as upgrading to the same package versions from an older image on > > the target, as well as allowing us to remove a substantial amount of > > code making the rpm classes much easier to follow. > > > > Some bugfixes from Bogdan Marinescu . > > SDK implementation and testing as well as a number of bugfixes from > > Mark Hatle . > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton > > Signed-off-by: Mark Hatle > > --- > > > > meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass | 533 > > ++++++--------------------------- meta/classes/populate_sdk_rpm.bbclass > > | 48 +--- > > meta/classes/rootfs_rpm.bbclass | 31 +- > > 3 files changed, 117 insertions(+), 495 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass > > b/meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass index 200a941..aa5b156 100644 > > --- a/meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass > > +++ b/meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass > > @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@ RPMBUILD="rpmbuild" > > > > PKGWRITEDIRRPM = "${WORKDIR}/deploy-rpms" > > PKGWRITEDIRSRPM = "${DEPLOY_DIR}/sources/deploy-srpm" > > > > +EXTRANATIVEPATH += "python-native" > > + > > Er, no! > > Why do we need to do this? We now need python-native at package > generation time? Why? Sorry, I meant to come back to this before submitting; the reason I added it was so that smart can find its python modules that get installed into the native sysroot (which I was surprised to find that the setup did not allow it to do out of the box, frankly). I'm sure there is a much better way to handle this though - we only actually need the path to be accessible within do_rootfs. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre