On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:09 AM Mark Asselstine <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 1:57 PM, Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:54 AM Mark Hatle <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> On 6/18/18 12:50 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > >> > Hi Mark > >> > > >> > It seems your distro is not inheriting it globally. Here I have > >> > INHERIT_DISTRO ?= "debian devshell sstate license remove-libtool" > >> > >> So is remove-libtool a recipe or a distro option? > >> > >> I'm asking because doing this half-way is causing a lot of confusion. > >> > >> If it's a distro option, then the recipes should work without it being > >> set. If > >> it's a recipe option, then the recipes that need it should use it. > >> > >> Right now it doesn't seem to be working with these recipes because they > >> don't > >> package the .la files UNLESS it's enabled. So the fix is either to > >> package them > >> (by default) or inherit the remove-libtool. > >> > > > > since we make it as part of meta/conf/distro/defaultsetup.conf > > its a default policy, its perfectly fine for a distro to disregard that > > however, then you fall into a non-default case. I am willing to accept > > per recipe patches but I would recommend to consider it as a distro > > feature for your distro. > > > > Andreas, > > Can you revert your "various classes recipes: Remove FILES entries for > dbg/dev packages" then? If this is a distro feature then these recipes > need to build without the QA issue and without the remove-libtool > distro feature being set.
This is in default features so I would not recommend revert, distros not using this feature are in best position to fix it, as I said before those patches are acceptable. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
