Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] Revert "python3-ctypes: depend on ldconfig only if distro-feature set"

[Changqing Li <changqing.li@windriver.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2744 bytes --]


On 2/28/25 18:50, Richard Purdie wrote:
> CAUTION: This email comes from a non Wind River email account!
> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
>
> On Fri, 2025-02-28 at 11:35 +0100, Jörg Sommer wrote:
>> Richard Purdie schrieb am Fr 28. Feb, 10:20 (+0000):
>>> DISTRO_FEATURES are high level policy controls, not "this should be
>>> included or excluded" controls. For example "pam" controls whether the
>>> access control modules are configured/used, not whether libpam is or is
>>> not included.
>> But it controls if other packages (e.g. systemd) enable pam support or not.
>> The same goes with ldconfig: Should ldconfig support in the packages be
>> enabled (which would pull-in ldconfig as dependency).
>>
>>> For ldconfig, as I remember, the distro config was about whether to
>>> include "ldconfig" calls after installing libraries and whether to use the
>>> ld cache.
>> If the feature is only about enabling code in the postinst script, than we
>> should find a better description of the feature
> I think the description needs improving and I think we'd take patches
> to do that.
>
>>> ldconfig: Include support for ldconfig and ld.so.conf on the target.
>> https://docs.yoctoproject.org/ref-manual/features.html
>>
>>> Packages being installed or not is an image level decision, not distro
>>> level.
>> Yes, that's also my understanding. But enabling some features (e.g. x11
>> support) leads to recipes set DEPENDS on libs and this leads to the
>> installation of some packages. So DISTRO_FEATURES influence indirectly what
>> gets into the image.
> The key word is indirectly. Where things have a hard dependency on
> something, they do include that dependency and it isn't conditional on
> a distro feature.
>
> In this case, the usage is tangential to what the DISTRO_FEATURE was
> designed for (ld cache). I do agree ldconfig is optional so RRECOMMENDS
> seems better than a hard RDEPENDS though.

I will send a patch to update RDEPENDS -> RRECOMMENDS

Thanks

Changqing

>
>>> In this case, perhaps we should drop the RDEPENDS to a RRECOMMENDS?
>> This would be helpful to remove ldconfig, if django is installed.
>>
>> But the main question is still open: Why should I want ldconfig and remove
>> it from DISTRO_FEATURES? What is this use case?
> It is being used to control whether the ld cache is being used or not.
> That has to be done at a distro wide policy level. Whether ldconfig
> makes it into the image or not is an indirect effect.
>
> We can control the inclusion of ldconfig for ctypes at a package/image
> level, it isn't a distro config level issue.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4712 bytes --]