On Fri, 2019-05-24 at 10:29 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 3:58 AM Luca Boccassi <luca.bocca...@gmail.co > m> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2019-05-21 at 19:06 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 5:36 AM < > > > luca.bocca...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > From: Luca Boccassi < > > > > luca.bocca...@microsoft.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > The pkg_resources Python module is useful by itself, for > > > > example > > > > for > > > > automatic loading of resources shipped in a Python package. > > > > Add separate packages for it, so that users can depend on them > > > > individually and avoid pulling in the entire setuptools, which > > > > include scripts to download other packages, which might not be > > > > desired on minimal images. > > > > > > > > Other distributions like Debian and Ubuntu already split > > > > setuptools > > > > and pkg-resources in this way. > > > > > > > > The setuptools packages now depend on the new pkg-resources > > > > packages, > > > > to avoid regressions for other packages that depend on them > > > > already. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi < > > > > luca.bocca...@microsoft.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > v2: restrict new RDEPENDS to class-target. As advised by > > > > Alexander, > > > > bitbake > > > > cannot resolve native rdeps that mention package names > > > > rather > > > > than > > > > recipe names. > > > > v3: manually add RPROVIDES to the native class instead of > > > > restricting the > > > > RDEPENDS to the target class as a better workaround. Also > > > > document why > > > > the package is being split. > > > > v4: re-send to the correct thread, no changes. > > > > > > > > meta/recipes-devtools/python/python-setuptools.inc | 11 > > > > +++++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python-setuptools.inc > > > > b/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python-setuptools.inc > > > > index 357aa07086..f49e078697 100644 > > > > --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python-setuptools.inc > > > > +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python-setuptools.inc > > > > @@ -37,3 +37,14 @@ do_install_prepend() { > > > > } > > > > > > > > BBCLASSEXTEND = "native nativesdk" > > > > + > > > > +# The pkg-resources module can be used by itself, without the > > > > package downloader > > > > +# and easy_install. Ship it in a separate package so that it > > > > can > > > > be used by > > > > +# minimal distributions. > > > > +PACKAGES =+ "${PYTHON_PN}-pkg-resources " > > > > +FILES_${PYTHON_PN}-pkg-resources = > > > > "${PYTHON_SITEPACKAGES_DIR}/pkg_resources/*" > > > > +# Due to the way OE-Core implemented native recipes, the > > > > native > > > > class cannot > > > > +# have a dependency on something that is not a recipe name. > > > > Work > > > > around that by > > > > +# manually setting RPROVIDES. > > > > +RDEPENDS_${PN}_append = " ${PYTHON_PN}-pkg-resources" > > > > +RPROVIDES_append_class-native = " ${PYTHON_PN}-pkg-resources- > > > > native" > > > > > > do we need to handle nativesdk case ? > > > > Hi, > > > > The parsing step of "bitbake core-image-minimal -c populate_sdk" > > works, > > while without the append_class-native workaround it fails > > immediately. > > Is this enough or is there something else I should run to check? > > > > yeah usually to test nativesdk we need to do it with generated SDK
I do have a nativesdk target in the distro at $work, but I realise it might be different enough. Is there a simple config change/command to generate it from Poky? -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core