Re: [OE-core] [meta-oe][PATCH v2] iproute2: split ip to individual package

["Richard Purdie" <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Wed, 2020-12-16 at 11:09 -0500, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 12/16/2020 6:50 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > +++ b/meta/recipes-connectivity/iproute2/iproute2.inc
> > > @@ -46,10 +46,11 @@ do_install () {
> > >  # The .so files in iproute2-tc are modules, not traditional
> > > libraries
> > >  INSANE_SKIP_${PN}-tc = "dev-so"
> > >  
> > > -PACKAGES =+ "\
> > > +IPROUTE2_PACKAGES =+ "\
> > >      ${PN}-devlink \
> > >      ${PN}-genl \
> > >      ${PN}-ifstat \
> > > +    ${PN}-ip \
> > >      ${PN}-lnstat \
> > >      ${PN}-nstat \
> > >      ${PN}-rtacct \
> > > @@ -58,12 +59,17 @@ PACKAGES =+ "\
> > >      ${PN}-tipc \
> > >  "
> > > 
> > > +PACKAGES += "${IPROUTE2_PACKAGES}"
> > > +PROVIDES += "${IPROUTE2_PACKAGES}"
> > This doesn't look correct. Why do we need to add all the individual
> > package splits to PROVIDES?
> > 
> 
> I want to add iproute2-ip into my IMAGE_INSTALL and not take the rest
> of the iproute2-$foo packages. If I don't add PROVIDES, build stage
> fails saying nobody provides iproute2-ip.

IMAGE_INSTALL is a runtime namespace, the same as RPROVIDES/RDEPENDS,
not PROVIDES/DEPENDS so using iproute2-ip there should be fine.

> > or is there some other reason for this? This is basically the issue
> > with some of the other package splits too, its not using the build
> > time verses runtime namespaces correctly.
> 
> If I misunderstood something or am not doing it right, let me know.

I think IMAGE_INSTALL should work (behind the scenes it adds to
RDEPENDS for the image).

Cheers,

Richard