> >> Is it useful to keep the option using cpio from the host? Why not > >> always use cpio-native? > > > > I guess it is a judgement call which tools to build and which tools to > use from the host. Not building tools which are guaranteed to be on the > host saves build time. > > I guess build time for cpio-native will be somewhere in the noise for > a typical build. Avoiding the extra complexity (code + test and QA) of > maintaining support for both cpio from the host and cpio-native would > seem to be far more of an issue. There's no guarantee that cpio is > available on the host (it currently needs to be installed manually if > building within the ubuntu:16.04 docker image, for example). >
Looking at the HOSTTOOLS in poky/meta/conf/bitbake.conf I see "cpio" is listed among required tools. So at least for "poky" a missing cpio would/should generate an error. > > Also, the need for cpio-native with the reproducible options it is going > to be fairly rare. > > I'm not sure I agree that wanting reproducible builds is a rare > requirement but if it is then isn't eliminating a rarely used code > path an argument *in favour of* switching to a single solution which > supports both cases? Agreed. I don't have a problem with defaulting to cpio-native, it would solve a few problems as well, but I think some kind of consensus is needed first. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
