On 11/24/23 09:18, Martin Jansa wrote:
On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 8:52 AM Alexander Kanavin <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 at 22:07, Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
The lzop is called in oe-core and I was under the impression that
oe-core shouldn't depend on anything except bitbake . So either this
stuff should be moved to meta-oe too (which would be unfortunate growth
of dependencies) or the lzop should be reinstated . I would obviously be
in favor of the later.
There are plenty of recipes in oe-core that have optional features
(enabled via PACKAGECONFIG) that depend on recipes that are not in
core. If you enable them, bitbake will say that the needed recipe is
missing and then you need to figure out which layer to add (typically
something in meta-openembedded tree). This is not that different:
optional feature, disabled by default, and the error will be the same:
missing lzop recipe.
I think this case is slightly different as this optional dependency might
be "enabled" by MACHINE config in some BSP layer and BSP layer depending on
meta-oe just to build the kernel (with BSP preferred compression) isn't
great - compared with some DISTRO config enabling some additional
PACKAGECONFIG in some other recipe the DISTRO uses.
At least if Marek agrees to maintain it instead of restoring Denys as
maintainer :).
The recipe seems low maintenance anyway and I use it often, so yeah, why
not.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#191181):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/191181
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/102759947/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
