Re: [yocto] are there any more obvious candidates for ASSUME_PROVIDED?
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 5:39 AM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: asked about this once upon a time ... are there any other possibilities for adding to ASSUME_PROVIDED in local.conf.sample, given that there are surely more native utilities that are fairly safe by now? for example, it's still weird that current default ASSUME_PROVIDED includes bzip2 but not gzip, especially since the quick start guide: https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/current/yocto-project-qs/yocto-project-qs.html lists *both* of them as required on your build host. it also seems odd that that list includes git but not subversion. anyway, you get the idea. may times utilities have bugs or undesired behavior for OE so this list is dynamic and sometimes not all distro carry a certain version which OE expects and there are ABI/format changes as it happened between svn 1.6 and 1.7 rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] are there any more obvious candidates for ASSUME_PROVIDED?
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Khem Raj wrote: On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 5:39 AM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: asked about this once upon a time ... are there any other possibilities for adding to ASSUME_PROVIDED in local.conf.sample, given that there are surely more native utilities that are fairly safe by now? for example, it's still weird that current default ASSUME_PROVIDED includes bzip2 but not gzip, especially since the quick start guide: https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/current/yocto-project-qs/yocto-project-qs.html lists *both* of them as required on your build host. it also seems odd that that list includes git but not subversion. anyway, you get the idea. may times utilities have bugs or undesired behavior for OE so this list is dynamic and sometimes not all distro carry a certain version which OE expects and there are ABI/format changes as it happened between svn 1.6 and 1.7 fair enough, but what about the simpler example of gzip as opposed to bzip2? it's just trying to understand what makes the list and what doesn't. rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] are there any more obvious candidates for ASSUME_PROVIDED?
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: fair enough, but what about the simpler example of gzip as opposed to bzip2? it's just trying to understand what makes the list and what doesn't. gzip can be replaced by pigz and it can be used to provide gzip-native -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] are there any more obvious candidates for ASSUME_PROVIDED?
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Khem Raj wrote: On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca wrote: fair enough, but what about the simpler example of gzip as opposed to bzip2? it's just trying to understand what makes the list and what doesn't. gzip can be replaced by pigz and it can be used to provide gzip-native ah, got it. rday -- Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
