From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RbhC0-0005A9-PR for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 00:27:57 +0100 Received: from azsmga002.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.35]) by azsmga101.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Dec 2011 15:20:55 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="48074285" Received: from unknown (HELO envy.home) ([10.255.12.232]) by AZSMGA002.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Dec 2011 15:20:55 -0800 Message-ID: <4EEBD245.5060103@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:20:37 -0800 From: Darren Hart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110927 Thunderbird/7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer References: <4EEB8E58.3030806@linux.intel.com> <59473640-1B02-42F9-A44D-6747552F80DE@dominion.thruhere.net> In-Reply-To: <59473640-1B02-42F9-A44D-6747552F80DE@dominion.thruhere.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.3 Cc: Koen Kooi Subject: Re: Can we drop eglibc-utils from LIBC_DEPENDENCIES? X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer 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, 16 Dec 2011 23:27:57 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/16/2011 01:07 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: > > Op 16 dec. 2011, om 19:30 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven: > >> I'm working on a minimal distro definition, and found that eglibc-utils >> pulls in bash (needed for tzconfig and xtrace apparently) > > My first thought is: fix the bashisms in those scripts, I bet ubuntu/fedora/arch/gentoo have patches for that, Agreed, this would be a good thing to do. However, I still shouldn't need to include this in a "tiny" distribution. >> which pulls in >> gettext, which requires wchar support. I'd like to remove eglibc-utils >> from my distro definition. I could override the default I suspect, but I >> wonder if eglibc-utils should be made an optional package that distro >> definitions, images, or users should specifically add if needed? >> >> The relevant bit of code appears to be: >> >> meta/conf/distro/include/tclibc-eglibc.inc >> >> LIBC_DEPENDENCIES = "libsegfault \ >> eglibc \ >> eglibc-dbg \ >> eglibc-dev \ >> eglibc-utils \ >> eglibc-thread-db \ >> eglibc-localedata-i18n \ >> eglibc-gconv-ibm850 \ >> eglibc-gconv-cp1252 \ >> eglibc-gconv-iso8859-1 \ >> eglibc-gconv-iso8859-15 \ >> locale-base-en-us \ >> locale-base-en-gb " >> >> eglibc-dbg and eglibc-dev also seem like they could be made optional. >> >> Thoughts? Would anyone object to me removing at least eglibc-utils from >> LIBC_DEPENDENCIES? > > I did a little digging: > > koen@dominion:/OE/tentacle/sources/openembedded-core$ git grep LIBC_DEPENDENCIES > meta/conf/distro/include/tclibc-eglibc.inc:LIBC_DEPENDENCIES = "libsegfault \ > meta/conf/distro/include/tclibc-uclibc.inc:LIBC_DEPENDENCIES = "\ > meta/recipes-core/tasks/task-core-nfs.bb:GLIBC_DEPENDENCIES = "glibc-utils" > meta/recipes-core/tasks/task-core-nfs.bb:RRECOMMENDS_task-core-nfs-server_append_libc-glibc = " ${GLIBC_DEPENDENCIES}" > meta/recipes-core/tasks/task-core-standalone-sdk-target.bb: ${LIBC_DEPENDENCIES} \ > > So it's only used for debug and/or SDK uses. I am going to argue that if you're going to support debug and SDK you're not minimal anymore and can live with bash/gettext/etc. Well, nfs isn't SDK only, there are valid deployment uses for that. But otherwise, agreed. > > Since I was bored I dug up an OE-classic: > > koen@dominion:/OE/org.openembedded.dev$ git blame recipes/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb > 749310c7 packages/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Koen Kooi 2008-07-07 21:24:38 +0000 1) DESCRIPTION = "Packages for a standalone SDK or external toolchain" > [..] > 9bff47f7 packages/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Tom Rini 2008-11-26 13:16:21 -0500 8) GLIBC_PKGS = "\ > 749310c7 packages/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Koen Kooi 2008-07-07 21:24:38 +0000 9) glibc \ > 749310c7 packages/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Koen Kooi 2008-07-07 21:24:38 +0000 10) glibc-dbg \ > 86fa8521 packages/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Tom Rini 2009-02-04 02:07:47 -0500 11) virtual-libc-dev \ > 749310c7 packages/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Koen Kooi 2008-07-07 21:24:38 +0000 12) glibc-utils \ > 749310c7 packages/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Koen Kooi 2008-07-07 21:24:38 +0000 13) libsegfault \ > 749310c7 packages/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Koen Kooi 2008-07-07 21:24:38 +0000 14) glibc-thread-db \ > f18a05e2 recipes/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Tom Rini 2010-02-09 16:43:45 -0700 15) " > 9bff47f7 packages/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Tom Rini 2008-11-26 13:16:21 -0500 16) > edd3a1de recipes/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Tom Rini 2011-01-18 17:56:52 -0700 17) LIBC_PKGS_libc-glibc = "${GLIBC_PKGS}" > edd3a1de recipes/tasks/task-sdk-bare.bb (Tom Rini 2011-01-18 17:56:52 -0700 18) LIBC_PKGS_libc-uclibc = "uclibc uclibc-dev uclibc-thread-db" Was this list used in the same way as LIBC_DEPENDENCIES above? > > So a few years ago that list of packages was only meant for SDK usage. > > If you meant GLIBC_DEPENDENCIES (note the extra 'G'), then you need > to > check if they are still needed for NFS operation. If so I am going to > argue that the dependencies should move to the recipes in question > instead of hiding in the task. Right, that makes sense. > If it's just a convenience package go > ahead and remove it, people wanting it can create a new task :) Agreed as well. I ran into an interesting issue. If I remove eglibc-utils from LIBC_DEPENDENCIES, it still seems to be getting pulled in, as do bash and gettext. Still digging to sort out why... -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel