On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 2:25 PM Renato Caldas via lists.yoctoproject.org <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm adding "packagegroup-k8s-host" to my image, and noticed the "k3s" > package also being built. > > Investigating further, it seems that by bundling kubernetes and k3s in > the same .bb file causes both packages to be built. The same probably > applies to the "packagegroups" in packagegroup-container.bb, all get built. > > In both cases, the norm I guess is for people to just want one of the > alternatives (kubernetes vs k3s; lxc vs podman vs docker). > > Would it make sense to split the packagegroups into individual recipes? > I'd be happy to submit a patch.
The grouping is intentional, and yes, so is the extra building. The individual package groups in that .bb are just packages, and when you bitbake a recipe, all of the packages are built whether they are installed or not. That packagegroup has primarily been used to drive the build testing and package repository construction steps of sanity testing. They could be split more, but at that point, we aren't much ahead of just the individual recipes with their inherent depends/rdepends. I have some pending work to split things up more in the container definitions cri, cni, etc, etc, but I haven't had enough time to complete that yet. Bruce > > Cheers, > Renato > > > -- - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#7681): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-virtualization/message/7681 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94943666/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-virtualization/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
