From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-io1-f42.google.com (mail-io1-f42.google.com [209.85.166.42]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.1149.1614814168477832718 for ; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 15:29:28 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=Cp+bj1R1; spf=pass (domain: gmail.com, ip: 209.85.166.42, mailfrom: ticotimo@gmail.com) Received: by mail-io1-f42.google.com with SMTP id o9so12797030iow.6 for ; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 15:29:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7Vc0F5/aw4F2yspIt4cX250wPoB7oIDZvHxnRVljAJ0=; b=Cp+bj1R1M5/T2YWId4MrkmRPppnxIhgF5W6odWhvrY1HWL4Loo43lytVf8APAqkBx3 clxmFL+fhTI89Oo6snB0K1LhhSoJInCHTaWkbKQutDDAzFI8b1jJRWMIHcdb3Slh8p6Y Xas7xcA5ugdGqLkcSbr0SpC4ypmggcolDrFmI6S64N7W7vBbE6WEosFr7ISEKzHC6XAK MLvzL7lCKsXRelD1WW2gizxmPHukv69jFYbpxT1Th//fivNt2HcdgSZtshq6gBK234vW fVtuSai+UlcGHQsQzhSywfqJnROWLh+Acso9xP9Vz1+CnBVjVED3i7sL/TxuOCKSETUs lzKA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=7Vc0F5/aw4F2yspIt4cX250wPoB7oIDZvHxnRVljAJ0=; b=DkANIUn06L3ZdYFM/ttysI9vZSqcG0gNgol1zsibGawfOvREecfxOgV27pccPHYTCJ 4aoNVTXp5Hb1s3xitNHq91oZzCXDGvmd0BoDCh+0nQ7uKZ3SjfA+zKhJCAzZDwiKgxOv l/UiMiVmTR8xGNK/Igmu/Gkc3Y8QBBc2157eWwr75H5pbyALs5Umv/MpHPsdmnnqkcL8 DTm9VrsBFYEpmnNjJIf66C2VqCH7eao0wxgH+XxDuJf/szZiZ85xMwZrYSO1/jw+q4v+ 2iMP3j/r+ZJodaqoWtPbRFtfmE437khe3O8HItuglV8UH4WG/4yE9nf8+oXc2n2p/KrP Ozag== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ifTLmD24NoIZiVIiUG7nRUgTzjNgenmsv/337rk6nQvA0SIJE XRQEb/habEa9WHgdJaR/6SesZXYaoZ7BXb7anvg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwNca1wWM91bThm49HqNFZFSUSZfu36IiUvBCxJjbsJw1zwhTD+DekQLgiAeUws2QomGwJ1IVyBhLAfiQeZ5Lw= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:9252:: with SMTP id e18mr1450638iol.146.1614814167553; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 15:29:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <16689EFE3DC0BB92.17298@lists.yoctoproject.org> <2a6603ec08c0aee64364961c0d9eca0ef7ea6aaa.camel@linuxfoundation.org> <1668EF1279DA9D8B.4829@lists.yoctoproject.org> In-Reply-To: <1668EF1279DA9D8B.4829@lists.yoctoproject.org> From: "Tim Orling" Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 15:29:16 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [yocto] Reducing the perl footprint on my image To: ticotimo@gmail.com Cc: Richard Purdie , Rusty Howell , "Yocto (yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org)" , diego.santacruz@spinetix.com, "steve@sakoman.com" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d5db3d05bcaa3821" --000000000000d5db3d05bcaa3821 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 12:28 PM Tim Orling via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 7:06 AM Rusty Howell wrote: > >> Steve, you're right. My image.bb is adding various lmsensors packages >> to the IMAGE_INSTALL, some of which depend on perl-modules. perl-modules >> seems to be the big monster, not perl. We need lmsensors. So I guess my >> question is really, how can I (or can I at all) reduce the footprint of >> perl-modules? perl-modules doesn't have any Depends, rather it has a long >> list (~ 670) of Recommends. >> >> > If you look at the lmsensors recipe, the lmsensors-sensorsdetect [1] and > lmsensors-sensorsconfconvert [2] subpackages both have perl-modules in > RDEPENDS. > One way to determine the ACTUAL dependencies is to run the perl.req script > from rpm [3]. > Related bug [6] > > $ perl.req sensors-detect > perl >= 0:5.004 > perl(Fcntl) > perl(File::Basename) > perl(constant) > perl(strict) > perl(vars) > > $ perl.req sensors-conf-convert > perl(strict) > perl(vars) > > You then need to translate those into the perl-modules-* subpackages, > which is easiest to see in perl-rdepends.txt [4]. > > I have not built nor tested this, but using the described approach I have > a patch for lmsensors [5]. > > Please cherry-pick, test and if it works, add your signed-off-by and > submit to the mailing list. > > [1] > https://git.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded/tree/meta-oe/recipes-bsp/lm_sensors/lmsensors_3.6.0.bb#n154 > [2] > https://git.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded/tree/meta-oe/recipes-bsp/lm_sensors/lmsensors_3.6.0.bb#n159 > [3] > https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/master/scripts/perl.req > [4] > http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky/tree/meta/recipes-devtools/perl/files/perl-rdepends.txt > [5] > https://git.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded-contrib/commit/?h=timo/lmsensors-perldeps&id=467a6bdce3877b27253c932d806f853b916a8f9e > [6] https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13376 > > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 1:49 PM Richard Purdie < >> richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 2021-03-02 at 20:42 +0000, Diego Santa Cruz via >>> lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: >>> > > -----Original Message----- >>> > > From: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org On >>> > > Behalf Of Steve Sakoman via lists.yoctoproject.org >>> > > Sent: 02 March 2021 21:06 >>> > > To: Steve Sakoman >>> > > Cc: rustyhowell@gmail.com; Yocto (yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org) >>> > > >>> > > Subject: Re: [yocto] Reducing the perl footprint on my image >>> > > >>> > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 10:01 AM Steve Sakoman via >>> > > lists.yoctoproject.org >>> > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 6:26 AM wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > I have an image that is using debian package management >>> > > (PACKAGE_CLASSES = "package_deb"). Because apt and dpkg require >>> perl, >>> > > perl is being installed in the image. No problem. Except that the >>> entire perl >>> > > stack is 669 packages. >>> > > > >>> > > > I just took a look at the manifest for one of my images that >>> includes >>> > > > PACKAGE_CLASSES = "package_deb". I see the perl package plus 43 >>> > > > perl-module packages. Are you sure that something else in your >>> images >>> > > > isn't pulling in all of those other perl-module packages? >>> > > >>> > > It just occurred to me to make sure you are looking in the image >>> > > manifest to see which packages are actually installed in your image. >>> > > The perl recipe does generate 676 packages (in dunfell) so perhaps >>> you >>> > > might be looking at the generated packages rather than the installed >>> > > packages?? >>> > > >>> > >>> > I encountered a similar problem with package management enabled and >>> rpm >>> > as package format, where I also just install rpm for package >>> management >>> > and not all dnf stack. I get quite a lot of perl and python packages >>> > into the image which are pulled by the rpm package, but they are only >>> > needed for things like rpm-build, rpm-sign, etc., not for the bare >>> > rpm command, which is the only one I need in the image. >>> > >>> > So I locally extended the rpm recipe to split those tools into >>> rpm-build, >>> > rpm-sign and rpm-archive and skip those packages in the image. I >>> should >>> > probably send patches for that to oe-core. Is that something that could >>> > be accepted? >>> >>> Not sure they need to go to separate packages but moving those >>> three to some kind of "build" package would make a lot of sense >>> to me at least. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Richard >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > --000000000000d5db3d05bcaa3821 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 12:28 PM Tim Orling via lists.yoctoproject.org <ticotimo=3Dgmail.com@lists.yoctoproj= ect.org> wrote:



=
On Tue, Mar 2, 202= 1 at 1:49 PM Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wro= te:
On Tue, 2021-03-02 at 20:42 +0000, Diego Sant= a Cruz via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org <yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org> On=
> > Behalf Of Steve Sakoman via lists.yoctoproject.org
> > Sent: 02 March 2021 21:06
> > To: Steve Sakoman <steve@sakoman.com>
> > Cc: r= ustyhowell@gmail.com; Yocto (yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org)
> > <yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org>
> > Subject: Re: [yocto] Reducing the perl footprint on my image
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 10:01 AM Steve Sakoman via
> > lists.yoctoproject.org <steve=3Dsakoman.com@lists.yoctop= roject.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 6:26 AM <rustyhowell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I have an image that is using debian package managemen= t
> > (PACKAGE_CLASSES =3D "package_deb").=C2=A0 Because apt= and dpkg require perl,
> > perl is being installed in the image.=C2=A0 =C2=A0No problem.=C2= = =A0 Except that the entire perl
> > stack is 669 packages.
> > >
> > > I just took a look at the manifest for one of my images tha= t includes
> > > PACKAGE_CLASSES =3D "package_deb".=C2=A0 I see th= e perl package plus 43
> > > perl-module packages.=C2=A0 Are you sure that something els= e in your images
> > > isn't pulling in all of those other perl-module package= s?
> >
> > It just occurred to me to make sure you are looking in the image=
> > manifest to see which packages are actually installed in your im= age.
> > The perl recipe does generate 676 packages (in dunfell) so perha= ps you
> > might be looking at the generated packages rather than the insta= lled
> > packages??
> >
>
> I encountered a similar problem with package management enabled and r= pm=C2=A0
> as package format, where I also just install rpm for package manageme= nt=C2=A0
> and not all dnf stack. I get quite a lot of perl and python packages= =C2=A0
> into the image which are pulled by the rpm package, but they are only=
> needed for things like rpm-build, rpm-sign, etc., not for the bare=C2= = =A0
> rpm command, which is the only one I need in the image.
>
> So I locally extended the rpm recipe to split those tools into rpm-bu= ild,=C2=A0
> rpm-sign and rpm-archive and skip those packages in the image. I shou= ld=C2=A0
> probably send patches for that to oe-core. Is that something that cou= ld
> be accepted?

Not sure they need to go to separate packages but moving those=C2=A0
three to some kind of "build" package would make a lot of sense<= br> to me at least.

Cheers,

Richard







--000000000000d5db3d05bcaa3821--