On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 12:59 +0200, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> It was previously skipped as it was expecting plain connman
> to not be in the image, and for core-image-sato connman is always
> there.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <[email protected]>
> ---
>  meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/multilib.py | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/multilib.py
> b/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/multilib.py
> index 56aed62eea..0d1b9ae2c9 100644
> --- a/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/multilib.py
> +++ b/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/multilib.py
> @@ -42,6 +42,6 @@ class MultilibTest(OERuntimeTestCase):
>          self.archtest("/lib64/libc.so.6", "ELF64")
>  
>      @OETestDepends(['multilib.MultilibTest.test_check_multilib_libc'
> ])
> -    @OEHasPackage(['lib32-connman', '!connman'])
> +    @OEHasPackage(['lib32-connman'])
>      def test_file_connman(self):
>          self.archtest("/usr/sbin/connmand", "ELF32")

Hmm. I think this test is only meant to trigger in a lib32-core-image-
sato where lib32-connman would be present and connman would not?

The test name could certainly be clearer as its not a generic connman
test...

Cheers,

Richard

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#141897): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/141897
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/76448656/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub  
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to