Re: Does recipe specific sysrooot (or whatelse in current oe) break native dependencies?

From: Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@intel.com>
To: Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>
Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: Does recipe specific sysrooot (or whatelse in current oe) break native dependencies?
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 18:06:41 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1487005601.13854.249.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1487005422.13854.247.camel@intel.com>

On Mon, 2017-02-13 at 18:03 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-02-13 at 16:24 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > On Mon, 2017-02-13 at 15:36 +0100, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > > Hi Andreas,
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I think it's feature which was already there, but almost never
> > > triggered (even in test-dependencies.sh tests), but with RSS it fails
> > > reliably.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > See:
> > > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2016-July/124435.html
> > 
> > That's not quite the same, if I understand it correctly. In that email,
> > Richard was talking about "dependencies of that target are not needed
> > and not installed" and used "quilt-native" and "compiler/toolchain" as
> > example. In other words, if recipe foo DEPENDS on bar for getting foo
> > compiled, that dependency on bar gets ignored when installing "foo" into
> > the recipe specific sysroot because it shouldn't be needed anymore.
> > 
> > But the example here is a recipe foo which has a runtime dependency on
> > bar, so bar must be installed in addition to foo, otherwise foo will not
> > work.
> > 
> > This is where it gets tricky: do native recipes have RDEPENDS? They are
> > not getting packaged, so I suppose not. One could collect all RDEPENDS_*
> > values (regardless of the actual package), but that might be too broad
> > (for example, when "packaging" the native recipe wouldn't even produce
> > that package).
> 
> Apparently RDEPENDS do work, also for native recipes. Based on some
> testing, it seems that all RDEPENDS are considered, even those that
> refer to packages that would normally be empty, i.e. the sysroot
> potentially contains more than strictly needed, but that shouldn't be a
> problem.
> 
> Andreas, does adding RDEPENDS instead of (or, where needed, in addition
> to) DEPENDS fix you problem?

... and to avoid confusion: I meant adding gettext to RDEPEND_${PN} in
kdoctools, not adding it to every recipe which uses kdoctools.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.