Using debian packages management

Using debian packages management

[Michel D'HOOGE]

Hi, 

From time to time I try to use the debian packages management instead of RPM because I feel more "at home"... And every time, there is a problem -- but this time, I felt like I'll try to understand and solve it! 

I tried first with core-image-minimal, and it worked.
But then I switched to core-image-sato and had the following error:

ERROR : core-image-sato-1.0-r0 do_rootfs: Unable to install packages. Command '/mnt/Yocto/Fabric-x64/build/tmp/sysroots/x86_64-linux/usr/bin/apt-get install --force-yes --allow-unauthenticated apt packagegroup-base-extended packagegroup-core-ssh-dropbear dpkg packagegroup-core-x11-base packagegroup-core-boot packagegroup-core-x11-sato-games psplash packagegroup-core-x11-sato' returned 100: 
Reading package lists... 
Building dependency tree... 
Reading state information... 
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. 
The following information may help to resolve the situation: 

The following packages have unmet dependencies: 
packagegroup-core-x11-base : Depends: packagegroup-core-x11-utils but it is not going to be installed 
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.


I checked: The package exists in /tmp/deploy/deb/all/packagegroup-core-x11-utils_1.0-r40_all.deb, but it is *empty*. It looks as if it is just there to create some RDEPENDS in the recipe.


So... I played the game to explicitly add packages one by one to the image:
IMAGE_INSTALL_append_pn-core-image-sato = " packagegroup-core-x11-utils xserver-nodm-init x11-common xserver-common"


But now I have the following error:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 xserver-common : Conflicts: x11-common but 0.1-r47 is to be installed



So my question is:
Is using debian packages management definitely broken in Yocto? Or has someone managed to use it with some tweaking?


Many thanks for your feedbacks
Michel

Re: Using debian packages management

[Khem Raj]

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 7:11 AM, Michel D'HOOGE <michel.dhooge@free.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From time to time I try to use the debian packages management instead of RPM because I feel more "at home"... And every time, there is a problem -- but this time, I felt like I'll try to understand and solve it!
>
> I tried first with core-image-minimal, and it worked.
> But then I switched to core-image-sato and had the following error:
>
> ERROR : core-image-sato-1.0-r0 do_rootfs: Unable to install packages. Command '/mnt/Yocto/Fabric-x64/build/tmp/sysroots/x86_64-linux/usr/bin/apt-get install --force-yes --allow-unauthenticated apt packagegroup-base-extended packagegroup-core-ssh-dropbear dpkg packagegroup-core-x11-base packagegroup-core-boot packagegroup-core-x11-sato-games psplash packagegroup-core-x11-sato' returned 100:
> Reading package lists...
> Building dependency tree...
> Reading state information...
> Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming.
> The following information may help to resolve the situation:
>
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> packagegroup-core-x11-base : Depends: packagegroup-core-x11-utils but it is not going to be installed
> E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
>
>
> I checked: The package exists in /tmp/deploy/deb/all/packagegroup-core-x11-utils_1.0-r40_all.deb, but it is *empty*. It looks as if it is just there to create some RDEPENDS in the recipe.
>
>
> So... I played the game to explicitly add packages one by one to the image:
> IMAGE_INSTALL_append_pn-core-image-sato = " packagegroup-core-x11-utils xserver-nodm-init x11-common xserver-common"
>
>
> But now I have the following error:
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  xserver-common : Conflicts: x11-common but 0.1-r47 is to be installed
>
>
>
> So my question is:
> Is using debian packages management definitely broken in Yocto? Or has someone managed to use it with some tweaking?

dpkg is a supported platform in OE/Yocto

>
>
> Many thanks for your feedbacks
> Michel
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: Using debian packages management

[Michel D'HOOGE]

> > So my question is:
> > Is using debian packages management definitely broken in Yocto? Or
> > has someone managed to use it with some tweaking?
> 
> dpkg is a supported platform in OE/Yocto


Yes, according to the manuals, it is supported... But my config wasn't fancy at all and I was unable to produce core-image-sato.

To be sure, I'll try again with the plain config described in the quick start. And I'll give you an update :-D

Michel

Re: Using debian packages management

[Jussi Kukkonen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3142 bytes --]

On 17 October 2016 at 17:11, Michel D'HOOGE <michel.dhooge@free.fr> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> From time to time I try to use the debian packages management instead of
> RPM because I feel more "at home"... And every time, there is a problem --
> but this time, I felt like I'll try to understand and solve it!
>
> I tried first with core-image-minimal, and it worked.
> But then I switched to core-image-sato and had the following error:
>
> ERROR : core-image-sato-1.0-r0 do_rootfs: Unable to install packages.
> Command '/mnt/Yocto/Fabric-x64/build/tmp/sysroots/x86_64-linux/usr/bin/apt-get
> install --force-yes --allow-unauthenticated apt packagegroup-base-extended
> packagegroup-core-ssh-dropbear dpkg packagegroup-core-x11-base
> packagegroup-core-boot packagegroup-core-x11-sato-games psplash
> packagegroup-core-x11-sato' returned 100:
> Reading package lists...
> Building dependency tree...
> Reading state information...
> Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
> requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
> distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been
> moved out of Incoming.
> The following information may help to resolve the situation:
>
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> packagegroup-core-x11-base : Depends: packagegroup-core-x11-utils but it
> is not going to be installed
> E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
>

I suspect this is related to meta-oe taking over some X initialization when
you add it to bblayers -- this  maybe exposes a bug in the deb packaging
implementation. In any case I can say that a deb-based core-image-sato
builds fine without meta-oe.

Note that you may have to wipe TMPDIR after bblayers changes if you're
testing this.

I have a bug on improving the X initialization mess in oe-core vs meta-oe (
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5546) but please file one
on the debian packaging issue if it does not exist yet.

I checked: The package exists in /tmp/deploy/deb/all/
> packagegroup-core-x11-utils_1.0-r40_all.deb, but it is *empty*. It looks
> as if it is just there to create some RDEPENDS in the recipe.
>
>
> So... I played the game to explicitly add packages one by one to the image:
> IMAGE_INSTALL_append_pn-core-image-sato = " packagegroup-core-x11-utils
> xserver-nodm-init x11-common xserver-common"


> But now I have the following error:
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  xserver-common : Conflicts: x11-common but 0.1-r47 is to be installed
>
>
xserver-common RCONFLICTS with x11-common: the package manager is doing
exactly what it was asked to do here (you shouldn't install both of those).

 - Jussi



>
> So my question is:
> Is using debian packages management definitely broken in Yocto? Or has
> someone managed to use it with some tweaking?
>
>
> Many thanks for your feedbacks
> Michel
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4398 bytes --]

Re: Using debian packages management

[Michel D'HOOGE]

Thanks Jussi, it solved my issue (more explanation below).


> From: "Jussi Kukkonen" <jussi.kukkonen@intel.com>

> I suspect this is related to meta-oe taking over some X
> initialization when you add it to bblayers -- this maybe exposes a
> bug in the deb packaging implementation. In any case I can say that
> a deb-based core-image-sato builds fine without meta-oe.

You were right...
With the bitbake-layers utility, I checked the "appends" but not
the "overlayed" (BTW, -overlaid- would be better!?). And meta-oe
provides a version 2.0 of xserver-nodm-init, which triggers some
problems with debian.


> Note that you may have to wipe TMPDIR after bblayers changes if
> you're testing this.

I didn't have to. I simply set PREFERRED_VERSION_xserver-nodm-init
to "1.0" and I got my image!

But this raises another comment: I added the whole meta-oe layer
for a single recipe (ttf-dejavu). And I inherited unwanted side
effects.

So what is the best practice?
- to copy/paste the recipe into a dedicated layer?
- to modify the conf/layer.conf of meta-oe to include a single folder?



> I have a bug on improving the X initialization mess in oe-core vs
> meta-oe ( https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5546 )
> but please file one on the debian packaging issue if it does not
> exist yet.

I just read your bug report… and this problem is quite old.
Before it gets corrected in 2.3, it could be helpful to put a note
in the different Yocto manuals, to draw attention of newcomers to
this rather frequent problem.



@Khem Raj: I realized my answer was maybe a bit harsh and I want
to apologize.  This was just an amused comment that every time I
try something described in the manuals, this fails miserably. And
every time, I have the feeling that my config is close to the
default one. But the goal of Yocto is highly ambitious and it
implies knowledge in many Linux fields!


Michel