| Message ID | 20250311003556.3131699-2-rs@ti.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | Ryan Eatmon |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [meta-arago,scarthgap/master] packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk: set PACKAGE_ARCH | expand |
On 3/10/25 7:35 PM, rs@ti.com wrote: > From: Randolph Sapp <rs@ti.com> > > This packagegroup pulls a package that is automatically renamed with > DEBIAN_NAMES. This is not allowed due to a sanity check that was added > to prevent issues with packagegroups being aggressively cached and > DEBIAN_NAMES potentially breaking this cache. See [YOCTO #7298] or > 5bf3e447d2f in openembedded-core [1]. > > [1] https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=5bf3e447d2f5064495d83a8fad30229bcf1ecc9b > > Fixes: 731fd376 (packagegroups: Do not set package arch when unneeded, 2025-03-03) > Signed-off-by: Randolph Sapp <rs@ti.com> > --- > Should we just drop this package group? Only has 2 packages, one is just a demo, and the other (gtk+3) should be installed by DEPENDS only for packages that depend on it, not unconditionally as done here. Andrew > Tagged scarthgap/master as the origional patch was, but I don't think the > original patch has made it to master yet. > > .../packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb > index cd6dd895..e0a90a31 100644 > --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb > +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb > @@ -2,6 +2,10 @@ DESCRIPTION = "Task to add Gtk embedded related packages" > LICENSE = "MIT" > PR = "r2" > > +# Required for packages that are renamed using DEBIAN_NAMES > +# [YOCTO #7298] > +PACKAGE_ARCH = "${TUNE_PKGARCH}" > + > inherit packagegroup > > RDEPENDS:${PN} = "\
On Tue Mar 11, 2025 at 8:22 AM CDT, Andrew Davis wrote: > On 3/10/25 7:35 PM, rs@ti.com wrote: >> From: Randolph Sapp <rs@ti.com> >> >> This packagegroup pulls a package that is automatically renamed with >> DEBIAN_NAMES. This is not allowed due to a sanity check that was added >> to prevent issues with packagegroups being aggressively cached and >> DEBIAN_NAMES potentially breaking this cache. See [YOCTO #7298] or >> 5bf3e447d2f in openembedded-core [1]. >> >> [1] https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=5bf3e447d2f5064495d83a8fad30229bcf1ecc9b >> >> Fixes: 731fd376 (packagegroups: Do not set package arch when unneeded, 2025-03-03) >> Signed-off-by: Randolph Sapp <rs@ti.com> >> --- >> > > Should we just drop this package group? Only has 2 packages, one is just a demo, > and the other (gtk+3) should be installed by DEPENDS only for packages that depend > on it, not unconditionally as done here. > > Andrew Well, we could drop the gtk+3 package from the group and keep the demos so we know gtk+3 is still implicitly pulled. Gets weird considering this layer at one point came with default applications and libraries we thought were useful. I don't know. Ryan, Denys, do you guys think we've weaned enough customers off of using the example SDK directly to move to a more pragmatic packaging list? (Just the stuff required to test things and maybe some debug tools.) >> Tagged scarthgap/master as the origional patch was, but I don't think the >> original patch has made it to master yet. >> >> .../packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb | 4 ++++ >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb >> index cd6dd895..e0a90a31 100644 >> --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb >> +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb >> @@ -2,6 +2,10 @@ DESCRIPTION = "Task to add Gtk embedded related packages" >> LICENSE = "MIT" >> PR = "r2" >> >> +# Required for packages that are renamed using DEBIAN_NAMES >> +# [YOCTO #7298] >> +PACKAGE_ARCH = "${TUNE_PKGARCH}" >> + >> inherit packagegroup >> >> RDEPENDS:${PN} = "\
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 02:11:42PM -0500, Randolph Sapp via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > On Tue Mar 11, 2025 at 8:22 AM CDT, Andrew Davis wrote: > > On 3/10/25 7:35 PM, rs@ti.com wrote: > >> From: Randolph Sapp <rs@ti.com> > >> > >> This packagegroup pulls a package that is automatically renamed with > >> DEBIAN_NAMES. This is not allowed due to a sanity check that was added > >> to prevent issues with packagegroups being aggressively cached and > >> DEBIAN_NAMES potentially breaking this cache. See [YOCTO #7298] or > >> 5bf3e447d2f in openembedded-core [1]. > >> > >> [1] https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=5bf3e447d2f5064495d83a8fad30229bcf1ecc9b > >> > >> Fixes: 731fd376 (packagegroups: Do not set package arch when unneeded, 2025-03-03) > >> Signed-off-by: Randolph Sapp <rs@ti.com> > >> --- > >> > > > > Should we just drop this package group? Only has 2 packages, one is just a demo, > > and the other (gtk+3) should be installed by DEPENDS only for packages that depend > > on it, not unconditionally as done here. > > > > Andrew > > Well, we could drop the gtk+3 package from the group and keep the demos so we > know gtk+3 is still implicitly pulled. Gets weird considering this layer at one > point came with default applications and libraries we thought were useful. > > I don't know. Ryan, Denys, do you guys think we've weaned enough customers off > of using the example SDK directly to move to a more pragmatic packaging list? > (Just the stuff required to test things and maybe some debug tools.) Sorry, missed this question earlier. I don't have a preference here, whether toolkits like gtk+ should be explicitly listed in packagegroups any longer. That said, we used to have matching packagegroups for specific areas - one for the default/demo rootfs (e.g. the one in this patch is packagegroup-*-gtk.bb) and corresponding lists for the target side of the SDK (*-gtk-sdk-target.bb) and somethimes even the host side of the SDK (*-sd-host.bb). That way the rootfs can have a demo, which pulls gtk+3 toolkit, while SDK doesn't need a demo, but pull in the development package of the toolkit gtk+3-dev. As back then SDKs were not built from a corresponding rootfs recipe, but instead from own set of packagegroups. > >> Tagged scarthgap/master as the origional patch was, but I don't think the > >> original patch has made it to master yet. > >> > >> .../packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb | 4 ++++ > >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb > >> index cd6dd895..e0a90a31 100644 > >> --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb > >> +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb > >> @@ -2,6 +2,10 @@ DESCRIPTION = "Task to add Gtk embedded related packages" > >> LICENSE = "MIT" > >> PR = "r2" > >> > >> +# Required for packages that are renamed using DEBIAN_NAMES > >> +# [YOCTO #7298] > >> +PACKAGE_ARCH = "${TUNE_PKGARCH}" > >> + > >> inherit packagegroup > >> > >> RDEPENDS:${PN} = "\
diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb index cd6dd895..e0a90a31 100644 --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-arago-tisdk-gtk.bb @@ -2,6 +2,10 @@ DESCRIPTION = "Task to add Gtk embedded related packages" LICENSE = "MIT" PR = "r2" +# Required for packages that are renamed using DEBIAN_NAMES +# [YOCTO #7298] +PACKAGE_ARCH = "${TUNE_PKGARCH}" + inherit packagegroup RDEPENDS:${PN} = "\