On (04/11/10 10:56), Chris Larson wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Andreas Oberritter > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > I observed some unexpected behavior with BitBake 1.10.1. > > > > After having added ASSUME_PROVIDED += "gconf" to my distro conf, bitbake > > pixman didn't succeed anymore (a clean build after removing tmp). It > > couldn't find pkgconfig macros used by configure. When I tried bitbake > > pkgconfig-native, BitBake looped forever, as Khem already reported in an > > earlier mail to bitbake-dev [1]. > > > > I noticed that gconf is part of pk-gconf-ig, so I suspected that there > > was something going wrong matching the strings. > > > > BitBake uses re_match_strings, which contains the following code: > > > > for name in strings: > > if (name==target or > > re.search(name,target)!=None): > > return True > > return False > > > > Looking at other occurences of ASSUME_PROVIDED, I noticed that everybody > > seems to assume that the syntax for this variable is a space-separated > > list of targets, and nobody uses regular expressions for it. > > > > So, should I use something like "^gconf$" in my config? Or should > > re_match_strings be modified instead? > > > > First, bitbake's -I argument was made to operate the same way as > ASSUME_PROVIDED -- that is, they both add to the ignored_dependencies. > Then, efb0474231ed286073a5a5904094320da8cab28d made it so -I could accept > regular expressions (this was specifically for -I, for use with bitbake -g), > but it was done in a generic way, so it affected ASSUME_PROVIDED as well. I > suspect this was a side effect, not an intended result, but if anyone knows > better, feel free to jump in. > > I think we should definitely change it to use re.match rather than > re.search, but you'd still have to use gconf$ in ASSUME_PROVIDED to be safe, > and I think you're right, we don't expect that variable to be regular > expressions. I also think we should make it so words in the variable need > to be an exact match, while -I can take regex. Opinions?
I think -I and ASSUME_PROVIDED should have same syntax capabilities. -Khem _______________________________________________ Bitbake-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bitbake-dev
