From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.windriver.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B5E96C963 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 06:06:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s08662oN019940 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 7 Jan 2014 22:06:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.224.162.153] (128.224.162.153) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.347.0; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 22:06:01 -0800 Message-ID: <52CCEAC5.1090905@windriver.com> Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 14:05:57 +0800 From: Ming Liu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130330 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Purdie References: <1389082433-19396-1-git-send-email-ming.liu@windriver.com> <1389082433-19396-2-git-send-email-ming.liu@windriver.com> <1389103082.6899.27.camel@ted> In-Reply-To: <1389103082.6899.27.camel@ted> X-Originating-IP: [128.224.162.153] Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sstate: remove binutils-crosssdk from safe dependent list X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 06:06:05 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/07/2014 09:58 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 16:13 +0800, Ming Liu wrote: >> binutils-crosssdk is being depended by other packages like >> gcc-crosssdk-initial, so it's not safe to be skipped when checking the >> setscene dependencies in setscene_depvalid(). > Can you explain this change a bit more please? > > Personally, I think the code is right as it is, if the sstate object > exists, it was already compiled and we don't ever need bintuils* so its > a 'safe' dep and can be skipped? Actually I am not very clear about why the binutils-crosssdk should be a build time dependency, because based on my test, it's seems to being required by gcc-crosssdk-initial at runtime, the steps: bitbake nativesdk-eglibc-initial -c cleansstate bitbake gcc-crosssdk-initial binutils-crosssdk -c clean bitbake gcc-crosssdk-initial bitbake nativesdk-eglibc-initial the above will fail due to lacking binutils-crosssdk stuff in sysroot. //Ming Liu > > Cheers, > > Richard > > >