On Wed, 2023-09-06 at 21:28 +0200, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sept 2023 at 21:23, Richard Purdie
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > >  do_clean[cleandirs] += "${STANDALONE_SYSROOT} 
> > > ${STANDALONE_SYSROOT_NATIVE}"
> > 
> > This doesn't just force ordering but means target will always now
> > trigger the native sysroot as a dependency. We don't want to do that...
> 
> But I think we do. Target is using executables from native sysroot
> such as user management utilities from shadow-native, and they won't
> be otherwise present there.

Firstly, that recipe was a bit of a hack. In bygone times, we had a
shared sysroot and this was effectively creating it for the places we
hadn't converted to use recipe specific sysroots. There should only be
a small number of places it is used where we haven't found a better
way.

When you use it, the calling code first has to ensure the things it
wants in the sysroots have been built. The caller is therefore expected
to build the right set of dependencies.

Putting ordering constraints into the recipe is going to make people
think it all happens by magic. It doesn't and the caller has to be
careful.

I'm reluctant to add any dependencies when it should be clear the
caller is entirely responsible for this.

Cheers,

Richard

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#187353): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/187353
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/101197363/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to