On Mon, 2018-07-30 at 18:06 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote: > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Richard Purdie > <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-07-30 at 14:44 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote: > > > Currently the openssl 1.0 recipe defines a dependency on > > > hostperl-runtime-native and the openssl 1.1 recipe does not. Both > > > run > > > "perl ./Configure ..." as part of do_configure(). > > > > > > Since hostperl-runtime-native is included in ASSUME_PROVIDED, is > > > it > > > really useful for the openssl 1.0 recipe to list it in DEPENDS? > > > > > > ie is the openssl 1.0 recipe being unnecessarily complex or is > > > the > > > openssl 1.1 recipe being too simplistic? > > > > It is useful for things to list their dependencies and we did have > > an > > effort to actually list things out so we know ASSUME_PROVIDED is > > correct. This means we can spot areas we might be able to trim back > > dependencies (amongst other reasons). > > > > With the introduction of HOSTTOOLS, its perhaps less needed than it > > was > > but in principle it is still useful to know which things need a > > given > > item, particularly where its more unusual. I'd still be interested > > in > > trying to cut back HOSTTOOLS a bit more. > > > > The 1.1 recipe was pretty heavily cut back, probably too much so > > based > > on some of the patches we've been getting... > > Thanks. Is there an obvious reason why both recipes shouldn't be > using perl-native rather than hostperl-runtime-native? Building with > perl-native seems to work fine.
Build time overhead. openssl-native is one of the early dependencies (or it certainly used to be due to git-native before we ASSUME_PROVIDED it). Allowing openssl-native to use host perl cut down build time significantly. Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core