On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 8:25 AM Nicolas Dechesne via lists.openembedded.org <[email protected]> wrote: > > hi, > > I recently came into a situation where yocto-check-layer failed in > Yocto A/B for meta-qcom [1], while yocto-check-layer was not failing > in our CI [2]. > > After investigation, we found out that DISTRO is different in both > cases (poky vs nodistro). This problem in particular was in a mesa > file in meta-qcom, and with nodistro mesa is skipped ("skipped: one of > 'vulkan opengl' needs to be in DISTRO_FEATURES"). > > yocto-check-layer obviously depends on DISTRO (and MACHINE? and > others?). However I could not find any reference of what they need to > be set when testing a layer for YP compatible status [3]. > > I guess we need to clarify what that means to be YP compatible, and > what defaults are being used for that. Or suggest that we run it > against both nodistro and poky? >
If I read https://www.yoctoproject.org/compatible-registration/ then it talks about OE-core + bitbake > Any thoughts on that? > meta-poky is a distro layer which is YP compatible and AB jobs test against poky distro. > cheers > nico > > > [1] https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/valkyrie/#/builders/85/builds/606 > [2] https://github.com/qualcomm-linux/meta-qcom/issues/1029 > [3] > https://docs.yoctoproject.org/dev-manual/layers.html#making-sure-your-layer-is-compatible-with-yocto-project > > >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#222700): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/222700 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/115009504/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
