From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.windriver.com ([147.11.1.11]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TgfKe-0006AN-Ev for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2012 18:33:58 +0100 Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id qB6HJSSq012858 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 6 Dec 2012 09:19:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from msp-dhcp50.wrs.com (172.25.34.50) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.318.4; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 09:19:28 -0800 Message-ID: <50C0D3A4.6010108@windriver.com> Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:19:32 -0600 From: Mark Hatle Organization: Wind River Systems User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Eggleton References: <04747ce39a3fbbd538556c67247452b931a3ccc5.1354650148.git.mark.hatle@windriver.com> <1354807886.12928.9.camel@ted> <3896317.iJW1Gi8Xv1@helios> In-Reply-To: <3896317.iJW1Gi8Xv1@helios> 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 17:33:58 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/6/12 10:13 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > 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. This is used by smart which is in the function package_install_internal_rpm, which is used by populate_sdk_rpm and rootfs_rpm_do_rootfs. This could be moved into the populate_sdk_rpm and rootfs_rpm classes, or we need an easy way to simply add this to the path in the functions that call python-native. --Mark > Cheers, > Paul >