On Wed, 2025-12-03 at 12:55 -0800, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> Get rid of leftover cruft where a ptest-enabled recipe has a run-time
> dependency on ptest-runner; this is now handled by ptest.bbclass.
>
> This appears to be the only recipe in all of oe-core that had this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day <[email protected]>
>
> ---
>
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-extended/cpio/cpio_2.15.bb
> b/meta/recipes-extended/cpio/cpio_2.15.bb
> index fa011251e2..8c31209f77 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-extended/cpio/cpio_2.15.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-extended/cpio/cpio_2.15.bb
> @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ do_install_ptest_base:append() {
> DEPENDS:append:class-target = " ${@bb.utils.contains('PTEST_ENABLED', '1',
> 'ptest-runner', '', d)}"
> PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS:append:class-target = "
> ${@bb.utils.contains('PTEST_ENABLED', '1', 'ptest-runner', '', d)}"
>
> -RDEPENDS:${PN}-ptest += "ptest-runner coreutils"
> +RDEPENDS:${PN}-ptest += "coreutils"
>
> PACKAGES =+ "${PN}-rmt"
The commit message is a little misleading which I'm a bit surprised at
given your love of correctness! :)
ptest.bbclass sets:
RRECOMMENDS:${PN}-ptest += "ptest-runner"
which is similar to but not equivalent to an RDEPENDS.
The reason is this package requires the user from that dependency, it
doesn't work without out. That is an RDEPENDS, not a RRECOMMENDS.
So whilst it isn't too obvious, I'd say the recipe is in fact correct?
Cheers,
Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#227431):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/227431
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/116601478/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
