Message ID | 20250114200734.4191354-2-adrian.freihofer@siemens.com |
---|---|
State | Accepted |
Headers | show |
Series | Cover systemd.bbclass and devtool ide-sdk changes | expand |
Hi Adrian, On 1/14/25 9:07 PM, Adrian Freihofer via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > From: Adrian Freihofer <adrian.freihofer@gmail.com> > > Covers the changes introduced by commit > https://git.yoctoproject.org/poky/commit/?id=efa5f65c2214239ed7aaf7bd8998683e755c5660 > > Signed-off-by: Adrian Freihofer <adrian.freihofer@siemens.com> > Reviewed-by: Antonin Godard <antonin.godard@bootlin.com> > --- > .../migration-guides/migration-5.2.rst | 20 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/documentation/migration-guides/migration-5.2.rst b/documentation/migration-guides/migration-5.2.rst > index cb70e19da0c..c317587ee5a 100644 > --- a/documentation/migration-guides/migration-5.2.rst > +++ b/documentation/migration-guides/migration-5.2.rst > @@ -74,6 +74,26 @@ systemd changes > As a consequence, the ``systemd`` recipe no longer contains the ``usrmerge`` > :term:`PACKAGECONFIG` option as it is now implied by default. > > +- ``systemd.bbclass``: If a ``systemd`` service file had referred to other service > + files by starting them via > + `Also <https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/systemd.unit.html#Also=>`__, > + the other service files were automatically added to the :term:`FILES` variable of > + the same package. Example: > + > + a.service contains:: > + > + [Install] > + Also=b.service > + > + If ``a.service`` is packaged in package ``A``, ``b.service`` is automatically > + packaged into package ``A`` as well. This happens even if ``b.service`` is > + explicitly added to package ``B`` using :term:`FILES` and > + :term:`SYSTEMD_SERVICE` variables. > + This prevents such services from being packaged into different packages. I believe there's some misleading use of the present tense? This behavior is fixed no? So I would suggest the following: """ If ``a.service`` is packaged in package ``A``, ``b.service`` was automatically packaged into package ``A`` as well. This happened even if ``b.service`` was explicitly added to package ``B`` using :term:`FILES` and :term:`SYSTEMD_SERVICE` variables. This prevented such services from being packaged into different packages. """ Does this make sense? Cheers, Quentin
diff --git a/documentation/migration-guides/migration-5.2.rst b/documentation/migration-guides/migration-5.2.rst index cb70e19da0c..c317587ee5a 100644 --- a/documentation/migration-guides/migration-5.2.rst +++ b/documentation/migration-guides/migration-5.2.rst @@ -74,6 +74,26 @@ systemd changes As a consequence, the ``systemd`` recipe no longer contains the ``usrmerge`` :term:`PACKAGECONFIG` option as it is now implied by default. +- ``systemd.bbclass``: If a ``systemd`` service file had referred to other service + files by starting them via + `Also <https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/systemd.unit.html#Also=>`__, + the other service files were automatically added to the :term:`FILES` variable of + the same package. Example: + + a.service contains:: + + [Install] + Also=b.service + + If ``a.service`` is packaged in package ``A``, ``b.service`` is automatically + packaged into package ``A`` as well. This happens even if ``b.service`` is + explicitly added to package ``B`` using :term:`FILES` and + :term:`SYSTEMD_SERVICE` variables. + This prevents such services from being packaged into different packages. + Therefore, this automatic behavior has been removed for service files (but + not for socket files). + Now all service files must be explicitly added to :term:`FILES`. + Recipe changes ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~