On Sex, 2015-03-27 at 14:11 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Bottazzini, Bruno > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sex, 2015-03-27 at 15:57 +0100, Anders Darander wrote: > >> * Bottazzini, Bruno <[email protected]> [150326 14:40]: > >> > >> > On Qui, 2015-03-26 at 08:56 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >> > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:29 AM, Anders Darander > >> > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > * Bruno Bottazzini <[email protected]> [150325 22:50]: > >> > >> > > >> if one wants to launch a simple deamon, most modules are not > >> > > >> required. > >> > > >> He will be able to save space and exclude unwanted packages > >> > > >> from the final image. > >> > >> > > > I like this, though I've got a few questions that I just noticed. > >> > >> > > >> -PACKAGECONFIG ??= "xz ldconfig \ > >> > > >> +PACKAGECONFIG ??= " \ > >> > > >> + gcrypt \ > >> > > >> + kmod \ > >> > > >> + ldconfig \ > >> > > >> + ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', > >> > > >> 'blkid', 'blkid', '', d)} \ > >> > > >> + ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'efi', > >> > > >> 'efi', '', d)} \ > >> > > >> + ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'lz4', > >> > > >> 'lz4', '', d)} \ > >> > > >> + ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'xz', > >> > > >> 'xz', '', d)} \ > >> > > >> + ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', > >> > > >> 'libidn', 'libidn', '', d)} \ > >> > > >> + ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'acl', > >> > > >> 'acl', '', d)} \ > >> > > >> ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'pam', > >> > > >> 'pam', '', d)} \ > >> > > >> ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'x11', > >> > > >> 'xkbcommon', '', d)}" > >> > >> > > > It might be worth noting that xz has gone from being explicitly > >> > > > enabled, > >> > > > to depend on a DISTRO_FEATURES. > >> > >> > > Agreed and we shouldn't explode the number of possible dsitro > >> > > features. I'd also prefer if xz were kept enable by default so we > >> > > don't make a behavior change under the hood. > >> > >> > > ... > >> > > >> PACKAGECONFIG[resolved] = "--enable-resolved,--disable-resolved" > >> > > >> -PACKAGECONFIG[networkd] = "--enable-networkd,--disable-networkd" > >> > >> > > > Why do you remove networkd as a PACKAGECONFIG? > >> > >> > > If there is a real reason for this, it must be recorded in commit log > >> > > as well. > >> > >> > Guys, if you continue this patch you will see that networkd will always > >> > be enabled. Systemd will always configure/make it however, the package > >> > will not be installed if the user wants to. > >> > >> > With PACKAGECONFIG, we may not get everything "for free" as some data > >> > files will be installed regardless as well as some components from > >> > systemd cannot be disabled by their build system but we can run without > >> > them, for instance we can run without journald. > >> > >> The advantage of also keeping the PACKAGECONFIG for e.g. networkd (and > >> as much other things as possible) is that we're also reducing the build > >> time and size. Sure, it might not be by much, but all small bits are > >> valuable. > >> > > > > You are right! Maybe we should mix them ? > > > > e.g. if PACKAGECONFIG networkd is disabled then the package > > systemd-services-networkd will not be included. > > > > What do you think? > > You can add the files conditionally so these empty packages won't be > generated.
Indeed, do you know how to do this condition or have you got any example? > -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
