Re: RDEPENDS of packages created by PACKAGES_DYNAMIC not built before image rootfs

[Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>]

On 11/27/12 11:26 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 15:07 -0600, Mark Hatle wrote:
>> On 11/27/12 2:23 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
>>>> Bitbake doesn't know which modules this package will produce since its
>>>> using PACKAGES_DYNAMIC. It does its best effort to try and find DEPENDS
>>>> but it can't take the regexps and come up with
>>>> "pulseaudio-module-console-kit", hence it doesn't see the RDEPENDS.
>>>> There isn't any generic way we can teach it to do that either. If it
>>>> did, it would simply always build consolekit which you say you don't
>>>> want so its not relevant anyway.
>>>>
>>>> So basically, you need to decide whether you want consolekit enabled or
>>>> not and build accordingly, there is nothing you can do within bitbake to
>>>> "mind read" what the image is going to want...
>>
>> For the resolver, it has to use the RPROVIDES, PACKAGES and PACKAGES_DYNAMIC...
>
> and it does to the limits that are reasonable...
>
>>> No, you know that you will need pulseaudio-module-console-kit because
>>> pulseaudio-server RDEPENDs on it (not on any pulseaudio-module-* but
>>> pulseaudio-module-console-kit exactly). So it's not really mind reading.
>>
>> But after the recipe has been built, the required item from PACKAGES_DYNAMIC
>> should now be in PACKAGES... and if it doesn't end up in the PACKAGES list, it
>> would be a good idea to at a minimum trigger a warning...  The catch is, is
>> there any way to tell if something from PACKAGES_DYNAMIC was used..
>
> "After it is built" is no good to bitbake. It has to know what its doing
> without building things.
>
> All Bitbake can see is that there is some regexp in PACKAGES_DYNAMIC.
>
> Yes, Bitbake could take all the keys in the datastore, expand each one
> (since it could be constructed using another variable name) and find the
> ones starting with RDEPENDS, then apply the rexexp to each key and see
> if it matches. We one tried something like this and it is extremely
> slow, parsing would take a massive speed hit.

I was more thinking in the oe-core recipe QA stuff..  if there was a way to know 
that the following items were matched in PACKAGES_DYNAMIC for this item, and 
then check to see if they ended up in PACKAGES.  Then warn/error as appropriate 
if they don't match.

> The rule is therefore in corner cases like this (which are rather
> unusual), you add something to DEPENDS and be done with it.
>
> It is not a reasonable expectation for bitbake to figure this kind of
> thing out.

Ya, I wasn't advocating a change in bitbake for the detection, just a way to 
pass the data to the recipe and do it at that point.

> I agree that if it builds things and discovers some kind of missing
> dependency, that would be good to tell the user about.

--Mark

> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
>