On Mon, 2024-07-15 at 15:26 -0600, Joshua Watt wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 3:07 PM Richard Purdie > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2024-07-15 at 14:40 -0600, Joshua Watt wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 13, 2024 at 12:44 AM Richard Purdie > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2024-07-12 at 09:58 -0600, Joshua Watt via > > > > lists.openembedded.org wrote: > > > > > This patch series add support for SPDX 3.0 and sets it as the > > > > > default. > > > > > Currently it is not possible to have SPDX 2.2 and SPDX 3.0 > > > > > enabled at > > > > > the same time > > > > > > > > > > v2: Added tests and addressed feedback > > > > > v3: Fixed several oe-selftest and build failures > > > > > v4: Fixed silly typo mistake in staging.bbclass > > > > > v5: Reworked to make SPDX 3 output reproducible by default. > > > > > Variables > > > > > that introduce non-reproducible output are documented as > > > > > such. > > > > > v6: Many changes: > > > > > * Fixed bug where building baremetal images would break > > > > > SPDX > > > > > 2.2 > > > > > * Most SPDX code is now in python library files instead of > > > > > tasks > > > > > * Removed dependency on pacakge_write_* tasks > > > > > * Fixed sstate selftest cases to account for SPDX 3.0 task > > > > > names > > > > > > > > This had a lot of failures in testing I'm afraid: > > > > > > > > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/83/builds/7134 > > > > > > This appears to be caused because the SPDX tasks are not running > > > for > > > some recipes (e.g. automake). It looks like this like: > > > > > > do_create_rootfs_spdx[recrdeptask] += "do_create_spdx > > > do_create_package_spdx" > > > > > > is not actually strong enough to make sure the SPDX tasks for > > > automake > > > run for e.g. core-image-sato-sdk, but I don't know why. I'll keep > > > looking, but if anyone happens to know off the top of their head > > > let > > > me know > > > > Can you be specific about which tasks you mean when you say "make > > sure > > the SPDX tasks for automake run"? Do you mean do_create_spdx, > > do_create_package_spdx or a different one? > > Specifically, do_create_package_spdx must be run for each package > installed in the rootfs before do_create_rootfs_spdx runs. I thought > that > > do_create_rootfs_spdx[recrdeptask] += "do_create_spdx > do_create_package_spdx" > > would do this (the do_create_spdx is probably not necessary), since > AFIACT, this is also how the packages get generated before being > installed in the root file system via manipulation of > do_rootfs[recrdeptask], but I think I'm missing something?
In packagegroups.bbclass there is this being added: do_create_package_spdx[deptask] = "do_create_spdx" do_create_package_spdx[rdeptask] = "" and bitbake core-image-sato-sdk -g -c create_rootfs_spdx lists "core-image-sato-sdk.do_create_rootfs_spdx" -> "automake.do_create_package_spdx" in tasks-depends.dot if I disable it. I'm not 100% sure what is going on and should sleep but wanted to share that before I did. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#202074): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/202074 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/107185009/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
