> meta-oe: add meta-python in LAYERDEPENDS (needed for protobuf)
This causes another circular dependency which we don't want, doesn't it?
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:44 AM Nicolas Dechesne <
nicolas.deche...@linaro.org> wrote:
> hi Armin,
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 8:59 AM Nicolas Dechesne
> <nicolas.deche...@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:51 PM akuster808 <akuster...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 09/24/2018 02:03 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > > > Hi Nicolas,
> > > >
> > > > On Monday, 24 September 2018 10:05:02 PM NZST Nicolas Dechesne wrote:
> > > >> hi Armin, Paul, Richard,
> > > >>
> > > >> I was looking at getting the compliance report for meta-oe (sumo
> > > >> branch), and I have found a few issues.
> > > >>
> > > >> * in meta-openembedded/sumo, grpc is in meta-oe layer, while it
> > > >> depends on meta-networking (c-ares). It was fixes in master, with
> > > >> 251878e8b6b9 (grpc: move it from oe to networking layer), so I think
> > > >> this fix needs to be backported to sumo as well if we want the YP
> 2.0
> > > >> compliance script to even work. If agreed, once merged, please let
> me
> > > >> know so that I can try again to generate a compliance report.
> > > > Is it appropriate to make such moves in a stable branch? I wouldn't
> have
> > > > thought so.
> > > >
> > >
> > > We have to. Per my understanding and why I tried very hard to make
> > > meta-openembedded clean ( appears I failed) is that if you want to be
> > > Yocto Compliant and include any layer that does not pass this test, you
> > > can not become Yocto Compliant.
> >
> > I believe that we want meta-openembedded to be compliant, and a good
> > example in general. I will send a backport your way for this change.
>
> Running the compliance script on meta-oe turned out to be an
> interesting exercise ;)
>
> I have found several issues, which I have mentioned in a few different
> threads, so I will summary here.
>
> * oe-core: fix the yocto-check-layer for dependency loop
> * I have the following local commits in meta-oe:
> meta-oe: add meta-python in LAYERDEPENDS (needed for protobuf)
> grpc: move it from oe to networking layer
> meta-multimedia: fixup LAYERDEPENDS (for dos2unix issue)
>
> With all changes above, the compliance script finds another issue with
> meta-xfce:
>
> AssertionError: Adding layer meta-xfce changed signatures.
> 7 signatures changed, initial differences (first hash before, second
> after):
> vim:do_install: 588d445122dccf317f15b0dd852f3888 ->
> ec086472d75d663c2fe836b935517810
>
> This is definitely a violation of one our rule since adding meta-xfce
> changed changes vim recipe.
>
> >
> > >
> > > Or relax your rules!!!.
> > >
> > > - armin
> > > >> * in order to run the compliance report, i locally added
> > > >> networking-layer in meta-oe/conf/layer.conf, and it creates a
> > > >> dependency loop since meta-oe <-> meta-networking. I found out that
> > > >> yocto-check-layer doesn't like that too much, and brutally fails.
> The
> > > >> following patch makes yocto-check-layer work again even with
> > > >> dependency loop. I am going to do a few more tests and send that
> over
> > > >> as a patch.
> > > >>
> > > >> diff --git a/scripts/lib/checklayer/__init__.py
> > > >> b/scripts/lib/checklayer/__init__.py
> > > >> index 2618416fab..0cc9bf3b6d 100644
> > > >> --- a/scripts/lib/checklayer/__init__.py
> > > >> +++ b/scripts/lib/checklayer/__init__.py
> > > >> @@ -151,11 +151,21 @@ def add_layer_dependencies(bblayersconf,
> layer,
> > > >> layers, logger):
> > > >> logger.debug('Processing dependencies %s for layer %s.' % \
> > > >> (depends, layer['name']))
> > > >>
> > > >> + # To avoid never ending recursion, we keep track of layers
> while
> > > >> + # they are being processed in this 'static' attribute.
> > > >> + if not hasattr(recurse_dependencies, "layers"):
> > > >> + recurse_dependencies.layers = []
> > > >> +
> > > >> for depend in depends.split():
> > > >> # core (oe-core) is suppose to be provided
> > > >> if depend == 'core':
> > > >> continue
> > > >>
> > > >> + if depend in recurse_dependencies.layers:
> > > >> + continue
> > > >> +
> > > >> + recurse_dependencies.layers.append(depend)
> > > >> +
> > > >> layer_depend = _find_layer_depends(depend, layers)
> > > >> if not layer_depend:
> > > >> logger.error('Layer %s depends on %s and isn\'t
> found.' % \
> > > > Patch looks reasonable to me FWIW.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
