> Am 11.09.2018 um 20:56 schrieb Alejandro Enedino Hernandez Samaniego > <[email protected]>: > > Hey Jens, > Hey Alejandro,
> On 09/10/2018 11:58 PM, Jens Rehsack wrote: >> >> >>> Am 10.09.2018 um 23:33 schrieb Alejandro Enedino Hernandez Samaniego >>> <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>>: >>> >>> Hey Jens, >>> >>> >>> As I explained before, when you create a manifest for python (target), it >>> uses the native build as base (it literally runs the native python that was >>> just built), it is assumed its the same version as target and contains all >>> the modules provided by upstream, otherwise the missing modules cannot be >>> checked for dependencies, and the manifest becomes incoherent, so its not >>> an option to have an incomplete python native build. >>> >> In that case, uuid for target never gets deployed, but it is. And I didn't >> see any packaging issues for `python3` nor for `nativesdk-python3` > > > I don't see what that has to do with anything, fixing the native build should > not affect what gets deployed on target, thats exactly why we have a > manifest, so they user can decide what to install and what not to install. The manifest isn't used for python3-native. You try to argue whether there is an error to be fixed - and I don't agree. Each fix requires effort - and that's why some errors will never become fixed. When the impact is reasonable or high enough, fixes are more likely. So: before you try to force me into "that's all ugly und must be seriously beautified just because ..." I will not do anything. When you give me a sane reason, I try to understand and make a decision. > I know you didn't see any packaging issues, but that doesn't mean they don't > exist, just from the log I showed you, I can tell you that the python3-crypt > package is not created correctly, for example, if you do: > > IMAGE_INSTALL_append = " python3-crypt" > > Boot the image, run python3 and you try to import sha3, it will fail, because > the sha3*.so library won't be on the filesystem. > > > And thats because the sha3.*.so library was just introduced in this upgrade, > and our manifest isn't aware it exists, hence it'll end up on python3-misc > and you have just created an unnecessary dependency from python3-crypt to > python3-misc (and worse, a dependency which were not even aware of, until we > test it manually), which beats the whole purpose of the manifest. > > The do_package function is not gonna fail just because, so you won't see > errors, but the files will be packaged incorrectly, causing runtime errors as > a consequence, the create_manifest task tries to solve these runtime issues > before they happen. That's something completely different. I'm not a python guy and I don't get from the ChangeLog what I have to change in the manifest. I can and will do such stuff when doing the perl update. For python, I ask for review because of things I don't know. You can give me a reasonable list of such changes and I update the manifest accordingly when I rebase the patch after Ross PGO patches are committed. > Cheers, > > Alejandro > > >>> Yes you probably need a patch to look at the correct directories for the h >>> files, as well as a dependency to make the h files available on >>> recipe-sysroot-native. >>> >> Please check the submission. > > I did, its not checking inside recipe-sysroot-native. I know. You could check the submission anyway and find the right patch and then argue differently. Cheers -- Jens Rehsack - [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
-- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
