From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp102.mer-nm.internl.net (smtp102.mer-nm.internl.net [217.149.192.138]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3687609AC for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 05:12:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from amavisd-new (mailscanner02.wrt-nm.internl.net [217.149.192.114]) by smtp102.mer-nm.internl.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C3DD3F76E for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:12:32 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-scanned: scanned by InterNLnet Mail Scan System X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 tagged_above=-999 required=4.5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.9, KHOP_THREADED=-1.5] autolearn=no X-Spam-Languages: en Received: from smtp102.mer-nm.internl.net ([217.149.192.138]) by amavisd-new (mailscanner02.wrt-nm.internl.net [217.149.192.160]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:12:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from TOP-EX01.TOPIC.LOCAL (mail.topic.nl [82.204.13.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp102.mer-nm.internl.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:12:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.80.45] (192.168.80.45) by TOP-EX01.TOPIC.LOCAL (192.168.10.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:12:40 +0200 Message-ID: <53DF163E.6020807@topic.nl> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:12:30 +0200 From: Mike Looijmans User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: <53DE3841.2000305@topic.nl> <1407082041.6981.42.camel@ted> <53DE72CF.5080303@topic.nl> <53DE75F2.5070107@topic.nl> In-Reply-To: <53DE75F2.5070107@topic.nl> X-Originating-IP: [192.168.80.45] X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: 9833cda7-5b21-4d34-9a38-8d025ddc3664 X-EXCLAIMER-MD-BIFURCATION-INSTANCE: 0 Subject: Re: What does "QA Issue: ... rdepends on .. but its not a build dependency?" mean 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: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 05:12:40 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =EF=BB=BFOn 08/03/2014 07:48 PM, Mike Looijmans wrote: > On 08/03/2014 07:35 PM, Mike Looijmans wrote: >> On 08/03/2014 06:07 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: >>> On Sun, 2014-08-03 at 15:25 +0200, Mike Looijmans wrote: >>>> I'm getting lots of warnings like this: >>>> >>>> """ >>>> WARNING: QA Issue: enigma2-plugin-systemplugins-wirelesslan rdepends o= n >>>> wireless-tools but its not a build dependency? [build-deps] >>>> """ >>>> >>>> What does it actually mean? What does it want me to provide here? >>>> >>>> The message in itself is correct. The package only has a runtime >>>> dependency. It does not require the wireless-tools package to be built >>>> or otherwise present on the build system. But what is the QA issue her= e >>>> and how do I get rid of the message? >>> >>> The issue is that if you built an image that just depends on whichever >>> recipe builds enigma2-plugin-systemplugins-wirelesslan and you try and >>> install that into an image without something else depending on >>> wireless-tools, the build will fail. >>> >>> Sometimes (like this case) these are genuine runtime dependencies and >>> you therefore just need to make the dependency visible to bitbake. >>> Sometimes these can be floating autodetected dependencies which should >>> wither have been in DEPENDS or turned off with PACKAGECONFIG. >>> >>> In this case I'm going to guess that the plugin is part of a >>> PACKAGES_DYNAMIC and hence bitbake can't see the dependency until its >>> too late (once the package is built). >>> >>> Adding the package name to PACKAGES would probably allow bitbake to >>> "see" it and avoid the problem. >>> >>> Yes, bitbake could in theory go though all the RDEPENDS/RRECOMMENDS_* >>> variables and try and guess which ones to look at however it would kill >>> parsing time :/. >> >> And in this particular case, even that would not help - the dependencies >> are being calculated after the "install" task has completed. There's >> code in the recipe that parses the output of the plugins and then sets a >> bunch of RDEPENDS and similar values for the package. >> >> I think the easy workaround here would be to just add it to the DEPENDS >> list - this particular recipe has been ported along from ancient OE, and >> it already has to wait for tons of other things, because it builds about >> a hundres useless plugins. The newer plugin recipes tend to have a >> recipe each, so they don't cause this kind of problems. > > Hmm, that did NOT work. I added everything it warned about to the DEPENDS > list, but it did not make a difference. I still got the warnings. Interestingly, the result of fixing this warning - now that I grasp its=20 meaning - is quite good. It turned out that three of these plugins depended= on=20 packages that could not be built. The others that triggered this warning no= w=20 have their RDEPENDS listed in the main recipe, and the build nicely include= s=20 the depended upon packages, solving both the warning and the potential prob= lem=20 it signals. I think the warning message should be expanded with a little explanation=20 though. It clearly states what the situation is, it just doesn't say anythi= ng=20 about what's wrong with that situation. Although googling on it will now=20 likely lead to this thread and explain it... Mike. Met vriendelijke groet / kind regards, Mike Looijmans TOPIC Embedded Systems Eindhovenseweg 32-C, NL-5683 KH Best Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best Telefoon: (+31) (0) 499 33 69 79 Telefax: (+31) (0) 499 33 69 70 E-mail: mike.looijmans@topic.nl Website: www.topic.nl Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail Topic zoekt FPGA experts http://topic.nl/vacatures/word-jij-onze-nieuwe-fpga-expert/