On Tue, 2025-12-09 at 13:19 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > On Tue, 9 Dec 2025 at 13:06, Richard Purdie via > lists.openembedded.org > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 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" > > 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? > > ptest-runner dependency is set in three different ways as seen above. > Are all three really necessary for ensuring the ptest user > requirement > is fulfilled?
user group dependencies between recipes are tricky to get right and each of the above pieces does appear to fulfil a specific need. I have a suspicion that yes, the bits are all needed. I don't like that 'design' but right now, it is probably where we end up. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#227435): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/227435 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]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
