On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 09:56:59AM -0600, David Lechner wrote: > On 11/21/25 8:39 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 08:36:14AM -0600, David Lechner wrote: > >> Add setuptools to test/py/requirements.txt. Otherwise, attempting to run > >> tests can fail as follows: > >> > >> $ ./test/py/test.py --bd sandbox --build > >> +make O=u-boot/build-sandbox -s sandbox_defconfig > >> +make O=u-boot/build-sandbox -s -j32 > >> Traceback (most recent call last): > >> File "u-boot/build-sandbox/../scripts/dtc/pylibfdt/setup.py", line > >> 23, in <module> > >> from setuptools import setup, Extension > >> ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'setuptools' > >> > >> Signed-off-by: David Lechner <[email protected]> > >> --- > >> test/py/requirements.txt | 1 + > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > NAK. It's the build of U-Boot that requires setuptools (specifically > > scripts/dtc/pylibfdt), not pytest. It was dropped as part of cleaning up > > the test/py/requirements.txt file before. A top-level project > > requirements.txt file would help avoid these problems, but we don't yet > > have agreement on that. > > > > OK, I think I see how it works now. It looks like most tools have > a requirements.txt already, but dtc is missing it. Would it make > sense to add a scripts/dtc/pylibfdt/requirements.txt containing > setuptools? > > Then `find . -name *requirements*.txt` would make it easy to find > everything that might need to be installed for a given target.
Yes, I think that's a reasonable step. I think in the near'ish future we might be able to instead switch to just installing pylibfdt. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
