Re: [OE-core] license.bbclass does not add recommends to dynamic packages
On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 17:55 +0100, Mike Crowe wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 July 2021 at 17:48:20 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 17:43 +0100, Richard Purdie via
> > lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 14:05 +0100, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday 07 July 2021 at 13:25:17 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 12:53 +0100, Mike Crowe via
> > > > > lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> > > > > > We're using LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE to create ${PN}-lic package
> > > > > > files and
> > > > > > relying on the automatically generated recommends to cause them to
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > installed in the image. This works well for most packages, but
> > > > > > fails for
> > > > > > packages where we only install package created using
> > > > > > PACKAGES_DYNAMIC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For example, liborc is being installed in our image but that
> > > > > > package lacks
> > > > > > a recommends for orc-lic, so the licences that apply to it are not
> > > > > > being
> > > > > > installed. This is because license.bbclass:add_package_and_files
> > > > > > iterates
> > > > > > only over the packages listed in PACKAGES.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Steps to reproduce on current master:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > $ echo 'LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE = "1"' >> conf/local.conf
> > > > > > $ bitbake orc
> > > > > > $ dpkg-deb -I
> > > > > > tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/orc_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> > > > > > Recommends
> > > > > > Recommends: orc-lic
> > > > > > $ dpkg-deb -I
> > > > > > tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/liborc-0.4-0_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> > > > > > Recommends
> > > > > > $
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (I would have expected the last command to produce the same output
> > > > > > as the
> > > > > > penultimate one.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Even if I could fathom out how to fix orc and any other recipes so
> > > > > > that they
> > > > > > did add the ${PN}-lic dependency, I'd be worried about not noticing
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > the problem affected other recipes in the future.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is there a way to teach license.bbclass:add_package_and_files to
> > > > > > add the
> > > > > > ${PN}-lic recommends for dynamic packages, or would it be necessary
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > teach package.bbclass to do so?
> > > > >
> > > > > That all sounds rather horrible :/.
> > > > >
> > > > > Would IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY += "*-lic" work instead?
> > > >
> > > > That seems to have worked well.
> > > >
> > > > I wonder whether this means that it would be better to stop adding the
> > > > recommends automatically and tell users that need this to use
> > > > IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY instead (either directly, or by teaching
> > > > license_image.bbclass to modify it based on another variable.)
> > >
> > > That would seem the better option to me at least...
> >
> > To be clear, I'd definitely support dropping that existing RRECOMMENDS code,
> > I think there are better ways to handle this now. I may even write that
> > patch :)
>
> I was thinking of something like the following untested patch:
>
> diff --git a/meta/classes/license.bbclass b/meta/classes/license.bbclass
> index f7978e266b..c87473cbb8 100644
> --- a/meta/classes/license.bbclass
> +++ b/meta/classes/license.bbclass
> @@ -63,14 +63,6 @@ def add_package_and_files(d):
> # first in PACKAGES to be sure that nothing else gets
> LICENSE_FILES_DIRECTORY
> d.setVar('PACKAGES', "%s %s" % (pn_lic, packages))
> d.setVar('FILES_' + pn_lic, files)
> -for pn in packages.split():
> -if pn == pn_lic:
> -continue
> -rrecommends_pn = d.getVar('RRECOMMENDS_' + pn)
> -if rrecommends_pn:
> -d.setVar('RRECOMMENDS_' + pn, "%s %s" % (pn_lic, rrecommends_pn))
> -else:
> -d.setVar('RRECOMMENDS_' + pn, "%s" % (pn_lic))
>
> def copy_license_files(lic_files_paths, destdir):
> import shutil
The above looks like the patch I just sent out! :)
> diff --git a/meta/classes/license_image.bbclass
> b/meta/classes/license_image.bbclass
> index 73cebb4d55..293a033855 100644
> --- a/meta/classes/license_image.bbclass
> +++ b/meta/classes/license_image.bbclass
> @@ -279,3 +279,6 @@ python license_qa_dead_symlink() {
> bb.error("broken symlink: " + full_path)
> }
> IMAGE_QA_COMMANDS += "license_qa_dead_symlink"
> +
> +IMAGE_INSTALL_LICENSES ??= "${LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE}"
> +IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY +=
> "${oe.utils.conditional("IMAGE_INSTALL_LICENSES", "0", "", "*-lic", d)}"
>
> I'm not sure whether it's safe to += an empty string onto the end of
> IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY, but I'm trying to avoid adding yet more
> anonymous Python. :-)
>
> Is that the sort of thing you meant?
Yes, += to an empty string is fine. I'm torn on whether we should do this
"magically"
or whether users should opt in to it when needed on a
Re: [OE-core] license.bbclass does not add recommends to dynamic packages
On Wednesday 07 July 2021 at 17:48:20 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 17:43 +0100, Richard Purdie via lists.openembedded.org
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 14:05 +0100, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 07 July 2021 at 13:25:17 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 12:53 +0100, Mike Crowe via
> > > > lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> > > > > We're using LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE to create ${PN}-lic package files
> > > > > and
> > > > > relying on the automatically generated recommends to cause them to be
> > > > > installed in the image. This works well for most packages, but fails
> > > > > for
> > > > > packages where we only install package created using PACKAGES_DYNAMIC.
> > > > >
> > > > > For example, liborc is being installed in our image but that package
> > > > > lacks
> > > > > a recommends for orc-lic, so the licences that apply to it are not
> > > > > being
> > > > > installed. This is because license.bbclass:add_package_and_files
> > > > > iterates
> > > > > only over the packages listed in PACKAGES.
> > > > >
> > > > > Steps to reproduce on current master:
> > > > >
> > > > > $ echo 'LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE = "1"' >> conf/local.conf
> > > > > $ bitbake orc
> > > > > $ dpkg-deb -I
> > > > > tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/orc_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> > > > > Recommends
> > > > > Recommends: orc-lic
> > > > > $ dpkg-deb -I
> > > > > tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/liborc-0.4-0_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> > > > > Recommends
> > > > > $
> > > > >
> > > > > (I would have expected the last command to produce the same output as
> > > > > the
> > > > > penultimate one.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Even if I could fathom out how to fix orc and any other recipes so
> > > > > that they
> > > > > did add the ${PN}-lic dependency, I'd be worried about not noticing
> > > > > that
> > > > > the problem affected other recipes in the future.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there a way to teach license.bbclass:add_package_and_files to add
> > > > > the
> > > > > ${PN}-lic recommends for dynamic packages, or would it be necessary to
> > > > > teach package.bbclass to do so?
> > > >
> > > > That all sounds rather horrible :/.
> > > >
> > > > Would IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY += "*-lic" work instead?
> > >
> > > That seems to have worked well.
> > >
> > > I wonder whether this means that it would be better to stop adding the
> > > recommends automatically and tell users that need this to use
> > > IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY instead (either directly, or by teaching
> > > license_image.bbclass to modify it based on another variable.)
> >
> > That would seem the better option to me at least...
>
> To be clear, I'd definitely support dropping that existing RRECOMMENDS code,
> I think there are better ways to handle this now. I may even write that patch
> :)
I was thinking of something like the following untested patch:
diff --git a/meta/classes/license.bbclass b/meta/classes/license.bbclass
index f7978e266b..c87473cbb8 100644
--- a/meta/classes/license.bbclass
+++ b/meta/classes/license.bbclass
@@ -63,14 +63,6 @@ def add_package_and_files(d):
# first in PACKAGES to be sure that nothing else gets
LICENSE_FILES_DIRECTORY
d.setVar('PACKAGES', "%s %s" % (pn_lic, packages))
d.setVar('FILES_' + pn_lic, files)
-for pn in packages.split():
-if pn == pn_lic:
-continue
-rrecommends_pn = d.getVar('RRECOMMENDS_' + pn)
-if rrecommends_pn:
-d.setVar('RRECOMMENDS_' + pn, "%s %s" % (pn_lic, rrecommends_pn))
-else:
-d.setVar('RRECOMMENDS_' + pn, "%s" % (pn_lic))
def copy_license_files(lic_files_paths, destdir):
import shutil
diff --git a/meta/classes/license_image.bbclass
b/meta/classes/license_image.bbclass
index 73cebb4d55..293a033855 100644
--- a/meta/classes/license_image.bbclass
+++ b/meta/classes/license_image.bbclass
@@ -279,3 +279,6 @@ python license_qa_dead_symlink() {
bb.error("broken symlink: " + full_path)
}
IMAGE_QA_COMMANDS += "license_qa_dead_symlink"
+
+IMAGE_INSTALL_LICENSES ??= "${LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE}"
+IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY +=
"${oe.utils.conditional("IMAGE_INSTALL_LICENSES", "0", "", "*-lic", d)}"
I'm not sure whether it's safe to += an empty string onto the end of
IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY, but I'm trying to avoid adding yet more
anonymous Python. :-)
Is that the sort of thing you meant?
Thanks.
Mike.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#153657):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/153657
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/84042415/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [OE-core] license.bbclass does not add recommends to dynamic packages
On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 17:43 +0100, Richard Purdie via lists.openembedded.org
wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 14:05 +0100, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > On Wednesday 07 July 2021 at 13:25:17 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 12:53 +0100, Mike Crowe via lists.openembedded.org
> > > wrote:
> > > > We're using LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE to create ${PN}-lic package files and
> > > > relying on the automatically generated recommends to cause them to be
> > > > installed in the image. This works well for most packages, but fails for
> > > > packages where we only install package created using PACKAGES_DYNAMIC.
> > > >
> > > > For example, liborc is being installed in our image but that package
> > > > lacks
> > > > a recommends for orc-lic, so the licences that apply to it are not being
> > > > installed. This is because license.bbclass:add_package_and_files
> > > > iterates
> > > > only over the packages listed in PACKAGES.
> > > >
> > > > Steps to reproduce on current master:
> > > >
> > > > $ echo 'LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE = "1"' >> conf/local.conf
> > > > $ bitbake orc
> > > > $ dpkg-deb -I
> > > > tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/orc_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> > > > Recommends
> > > > Recommends: orc-lic
> > > > $ dpkg-deb -I
> > > > tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/liborc-0.4-0_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> > > > Recommends
> > > > $
> > > >
> > > > (I would have expected the last command to produce the same output as
> > > > the
> > > > penultimate one.)
> > > >
> > > > Even if I could fathom out how to fix orc and any other recipes so that
> > > > they
> > > > did add the ${PN}-lic dependency, I'd be worried about not noticing that
> > > > the problem affected other recipes in the future.
> > > >
> > > > Is there a way to teach license.bbclass:add_package_and_files to add the
> > > > ${PN}-lic recommends for dynamic packages, or would it be necessary to
> > > > teach package.bbclass to do so?
> > >
> > > That all sounds rather horrible :/.
> > >
> > > Would IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY += "*-lic" work instead?
> >
> > That seems to have worked well.
> >
> > I wonder whether this means that it would be better to stop adding the
> > recommends automatically and tell users that need this to use
> > IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY instead (either directly, or by teaching
> > license_image.bbclass to modify it based on another variable.)
>
> That would seem the better option to me at least...
To be clear, I'd definitely support dropping that existing RRECOMMENDS code,
I think there are better ways to handle this now. I may even write that patch :)
Cheers,
Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#153656):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/153656
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/84042415/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [OE-core] license.bbclass does not add recommends to dynamic packages
On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 14:05 +0100, Mike Crowe wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 July 2021 at 13:25:17 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 12:53 +0100, Mike Crowe via lists.openembedded.org
> > wrote:
> > > We're using LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE to create ${PN}-lic package files and
> > > relying on the automatically generated recommends to cause them to be
> > > installed in the image. This works well for most packages, but fails for
> > > packages where we only install package created using PACKAGES_DYNAMIC.
> > >
> > > For example, liborc is being installed in our image but that package lacks
> > > a recommends for orc-lic, so the licences that apply to it are not being
> > > installed. This is because license.bbclass:add_package_and_files iterates
> > > only over the packages listed in PACKAGES.
> > >
> > > Steps to reproduce on current master:
> > >
> > > $ echo 'LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE = "1"' >> conf/local.conf
> > > $ bitbake orc
> > > $ dpkg-deb -I
> > > tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/orc_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> > > Recommends
> > > Recommends: orc-lic
> > > $ dpkg-deb -I
> > > tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/liborc-0.4-0_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> > > Recommends
> > > $
> > >
> > > (I would have expected the last command to produce the same output as the
> > > penultimate one.)
> > >
> > > Even if I could fathom out how to fix orc and any other recipes so that
> > > they
> > > did add the ${PN}-lic dependency, I'd be worried about not noticing that
> > > the problem affected other recipes in the future.
> > >
> > > Is there a way to teach license.bbclass:add_package_and_files to add the
> > > ${PN}-lic recommends for dynamic packages, or would it be necessary to
> > > teach package.bbclass to do so?
> >
> > That all sounds rather horrible :/.
> >
> > Would IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY += "*-lic" work instead?
>
> That seems to have worked well.
>
> I wonder whether this means that it would be better to stop adding the
> recommends automatically and tell users that need this to use
> IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY instead (either directly, or by teaching
> license_image.bbclass to modify it based on another variable.)
That would seem the better option to me at least...
> Losing the recommends would also meaan I wouldn't need to add
> --no-recommends to the image recipes that don't need the licence files.
>
> Thanks for the speedy response!
No problem, glad it works/helps!
Cheers,
Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#153655):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/153655
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/84042415/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [OE-core] license.bbclass does not add recommends to dynamic packages
On Wednesday 07 July 2021 at 13:25:17 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 12:53 +0100, Mike Crowe via lists.openembedded.org
> wrote:
> > We're using LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE to create ${PN}-lic package files and
> > relying on the automatically generated recommends to cause them to be
> > installed in the image. This works well for most packages, but fails for
> > packages where we only install package created using PACKAGES_DYNAMIC.
> >
> > For example, liborc is being installed in our image but that package lacks
> > a recommends for orc-lic, so the licences that apply to it are not being
> > installed. This is because license.bbclass:add_package_and_files iterates
> > only over the packages listed in PACKAGES.
> >
> > Steps to reproduce on current master:
> >
> > $ echo 'LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE = "1"' >> conf/local.conf
> > $ bitbake orc
> > $ dpkg-deb -I
> > tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/orc_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> > Recommends
> > Recommends: orc-lic
> > $ dpkg-deb -I
> > tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/liborc-0.4-0_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> > Recommends
> > $
> >
> > (I would have expected the last command to produce the same output as the
> > penultimate one.)
> >
> > Even if I could fathom out how to fix orc and any other recipes so that they
> > did add the ${PN}-lic dependency, I'd be worried about not noticing that
> > the problem affected other recipes in the future.
> >
> > Is there a way to teach license.bbclass:add_package_and_files to add the
> > ${PN}-lic recommends for dynamic packages, or would it be necessary to
> > teach package.bbclass to do so?
>
> That all sounds rather horrible :/.
>
> Would IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY += "*-lic" work instead?
That seems to have worked well.
I wonder whether this means that it would be better to stop adding the
recommends automatically and tell users that need this to use
IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY instead (either directly, or by teaching
license_image.bbclass to modify it based on another variable.)
Losing the recommends would also meaan I wouldn't need to add
--no-recommends to the image recipes that don't need the licence files.
Thanks for the speedy response!
Mike.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#153643):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/153643
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/84042415/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [OE-core] license.bbclass does not add recommends to dynamic packages
On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 12:53 +0100, Mike Crowe via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> We're using LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE to create ${PN}-lic package files and
> relying on the automatically generated recommends to cause them to be
> installed in the image. This works well for most packages, but fails for
> packages where we only install package created using PACKAGES_DYNAMIC.
>
> For example, liborc is being installed in our image but that package lacks
> a recommends for orc-lic, so the licences that apply to it are not being
> installed. This is because license.bbclass:add_package_and_files iterates
> only over the packages listed in PACKAGES.
>
> Steps to reproduce on current master:
>
> $ echo 'LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE = "1"' >> conf/local.conf
> $ bitbake orc
> $ dpkg-deb -I
> tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/orc_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> Recommends
> Recommends: orc-lic
> $ dpkg-deb -I
> tmp-glibc/deploy/ipk/armv7vet2hf-neon/liborc-0.4-0_0.4.32-r0_armv7vet2hf-neon.ipk|grep
> Recommends
> $
>
> (I would have expected the last command to produce the same output as the
> penultimate one.)
>
> Even if I could fathom out how to fix orc and any other recipes so that they
> did add the ${PN}-lic dependency, I'd be worried about not noticing that
> the problem affected other recipes in the future.
>
> Is there a way to teach license.bbclass:add_package_and_files to add the
> ${PN}-lic recommends for dynamic packages, or would it be necessary to
> teach package.bbclass to do so?
That all sounds rather horrible :/.
Would IMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY += "*-lic" work instead?
Cheers,
Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#153642):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/153642
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/84042415/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
