On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Hans Beckérus <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi. We have problem with one of our .bbappend files that tries to > split procps in some more fine grained packages. > Currently this is only done for 'top' and 'ps'. The actual issue here > is that /usr/bin/top.procps gets installed on our image but *not* > /bin/ps.procps? > > The IMAGE_INSTALL sets both procps-ps and procps-top. > The .bbappend looks like this: > > -- > > FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:" > > PRINC = "0" > > PACKAGES =+ "${PN}-lib ${PN}-top ${PN}-ps " > > # Make sure base package installs ${PN}-lib > RDEPENDS_${PN} = "${PN}-lib" > > FILES_${PN}-top = "${bindir}/top.procps" > FILES_${PN}-ps = "${base_bindir}/ps.procps" > FILES_${PN}-lib = "${libdir}/*-${PV}.so ${base_libdir}/*-${PV}.so" > > -- > > As simple as it can be ;) The packages-split folder contains both > packages, and they both contain the proper files after a build. That > is, procps-ps/bin/ps.procps and procps-top/usr/bin/top.procps. > > If we instead change to the below it works!? > > -- > > FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:" > > PRINC = "0" > > PACKAGES =+ "${PN}-lib ${PN}-top_ps " > > # Make sure base package installs ${PN}-lib > RDEPENDS_${PN} = "${PN}-lib" > > FILES_${PN}-top_ps = "${bindir}/top.procps ${base_bindir}/ps.procps" > FILES_${PN}-lib = "${libdir}/*-${PV}.so ${base_libdir}/*-${PV}.so" > > -- > > Using the latter recipe and after updating IMAGE_INSTALL both > ps.procps and top.procps ends up in our image. > But, due to all the frustration we have had with this, we would really > like to understand why things seems to fail miserably when using the > first variant of it. > Using both recipes the lib package get installed correctly. We also > have busybox applets enabled for 'ps' and 'top' but that we will take > care of using the already existing logic in procps for > update-alternatives. But since '/bin/ps.procps' does not get installed > there is no point in even trying. > > Anyone that has a clue? > > We are on a very early Yocto/poky 1.5 baseline. > When you least expect to find it, you do ;) It happens to be that the build framework on-top of Yocto was recently changed and that the image recipe was picked up from a second source. In that version only procps-top_ps was included. By actually stepping the image recipe revision it was obvious since it still built the old one! Sorry for disturbing the peace :)
> Thanks. > Hans -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
