> -----Original Message-----
> From: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org> On Behalf Of Peter Kjellerstedt
> Sent: den 31 augusti 2023 19:28
> To: Ryan Eatmon <reat...@ti.com>; Max Krummenacher <max.oss...@gmail.com>;
> openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> Cc: Max Krummenacher <max.krummenac...@toradex.com>; Randolph Sapp
> <r...@ti.com>
> Subject: Re: [oe][OE-core][Patch 0/1] Revert "bin_package.bbclass: Inhibit
> the default dependencies"
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ryan Eatmon <reat...@ti.com>
> > Sent: den 28 augusti 2023 19:10
> > To: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerst...@axis.com>; Max Krummenacher
> > <max.oss...@gmail.com>; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> > Cc: Max Krummenacher <max.krummenac...@toradex.com>; Randolph Sapp
> > <r...@ti.com>
> > Subject: Re: [oe][OE-core][Patch 0/1] Revert "bin_package.bbclass: Inhibit
> > the default dependencies"
> >
> > On 8/27/2023 4:23 PM, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote:
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Max Krummenacher <max.oss...@gmail.com>
> > >> Sent: den 27 augusti 2023 10:10
> > >> To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Peter Kjellerstedt
> > >> <peter.kjellerst...@axis.com>
> > >> Cc: Max Krummenacher <max.krummenac...@toradex.com>; Randolph Sapp
> > >> <r...@ti.com>
> > >> Subject: [oe][OE-core][Patch 0/1] Revert "bin_package.bbclass: Inhibit
> > >> the
> > >> default dependencies"
> > >>
> > >> From: Max Krummenacher <max.krummenac...@toradex.com>
> > >>
> > >> Hi
> > >>
> > >> With commit d1d09bd4d7 ("bin_package.bbclass: Inhibit the default
> > >> dependencies") applied I'm getting a lot of these errors, i.e. qa
> > >> does miss libc and compiler provided libs:
> > >>
> > >> ERROR: ti-img-rogue-umlibs-23.1.6404501-r2 do_package_qa: QA Issue:
> > >> /usr/lib/libusc.so.23.1.6404501 contained in package ti-img-rogue-umlibs
> > >> requires ld-linux-aarch64.so.1(GLIBC_2.17)(64bit), but no providers found
> > >> in RDEPENDS:ti-img-rogue-umlibs? [file-rdeps]
> > >> ERROR: ti-img-rogue-umlibs-23.1.6404501-r2 do_package_qa: QA Issue:
> > >> /usr/lib/libusc.so.23.1.6404501 contained in package ti-img-rogue-umlibs
> > >> requires libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.17)(64bit), but no providers found in
> > >> RDEPENDS:ti-img-rogue-umlibs? [file-rdeps]
> > >> ERROR: ti-img-rogue-umlibs-23.1.6404501-r2 do_package_qa: QA Issue:
> > >> /usr/lib/libufwriter.so.23.1.6404501 contained in package ti-img-rogue-
> > >> umlibs requires libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.14)(64bit), but no providers
> > >> found in RDEPENDS:ti-img-rogue-umlibs? [file-rdeps]
> > >>
> > >> Reverting the commit makes the build pass, alternatively adding
> > >> to depends in the recipe which is using the bin_package class
> > >> fixes it too:
> > >>
> > >> DEPENDS += " virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}compilerlibs virtual/libc"
> > >>
> > >> I'd prefer reverting removing the default dependencies over fixing
> > >> each of the recipes which do use the bin_package class to actually
> > >> install binaries running in the target user space.
> > >>
> > >> Any opinions?
> > >
> > > Bummer. I guess we will have to update our recipes individually
> > > instead. :(
> >
> > Was there some issue that your patch was seeking to solve? There was
> > not much explanation in your patch or discussion about it on the mailing
> > list before it was accepted.
> >
> > Or did this just seem like something to do since this class doesn't
> > build anything?
>
> It just seemed logical that since nothing is built, there should be
> no need for the compiler. I did, however, miss the potential need for
> the runtime libraries.
>
> > Just looking for background.
> >
> > Your commit is also the source of another error with this the same
> > ti-img-rogue-umlibs recipe that I've been trying to track down all last
> > week. Max just beat me to finding it.
> >
> > I'm voting to revert your patch unless there is compelling reason for
> > your patch.
>
> If it was not obvious from my response above, I am in favor of reverting
> my change since the errors reported by Max obviously was not part of my
> use case and did not affect any of our recipes.
>
> //Peter
Please apply Max' revert. I thought it was applied back in August when
this was discussed, but it apparently never happened.
//Peter
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#188795):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/188795
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/100987453/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
