Hi, I want to build an image that does in the end NOT contain the virtual/libc used for building the elements of the image because the final target libc is provided pre-built in a different way through another recipe and package. [Yes I understand the version risks]
Given that the virtual/libc sysroot is still needed to build packages properly, I thought that simply not packaging virtual/libc and then adding in the other package into the image would do the trick. "dtc" is my unmodified test recipe for the concept. I must be missing some fine point however, because now I can't even build the test recipe anymore: ERROR: dtc-1.5.1-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: /usr/lib/libfdt.so.1 contained in package dtc requires ld-linux-aarch64.so.1(GLIBC_2.17)(64bit), but no providers found in RDEPENDS_dtc? [file-rdeps] ERROR: dtc-1.5.1-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: /usr/lib/libfdt.so.1 contained in package dtc requires libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.17)(64bit), but no providers found in RDEPENDS_dtc? [file-rdeps] ERROR: dtc-1.5.1-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: /usr/lib/libfdt.so.1 contained in package dtc requires libc.so.6()(64bit), but no providers found in RDEPENDS_dtc? [file-rdeps] ERROR: dtc-1.5.1-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: /usr/lib/libfdt.so.1 contained in package dtc requires ld-linux-aarch64.so.1()(64bit), but no providers found in RDEPENDS_dtc? [file-rdeps] ERROR: dtc-1.5.1-r0 do_package_qa: QA run found fatal errors. Please consider fixing them. I found the change that RDEPENDS are no longer recursively checked, so I thought I should find how the dependency is directly resolved and missed via bitbake -e. Bitbake -e shows that RDEPENDS for dtc is empty, i.e., a shared library glibc file based runtime dependency usually must be filled by some other magic that I can't seem to grasp. I have not seen receipes all over the place explicitly specifying an RDPENDS for the libc used. The tmp/pkgdata/*/runtime/ file for my other package clearly shows FILERPROVIDES for exactly the "missing" files. I could decide to ignore file-rdeps, but I'd rather "consider fixing them". I also did read the "shlibdeps" bullet in "Automatically Added Runtime Dependencies" and then grepped quite a bit through meta/classes and bitbake itself. File-rdeps checking does not seem to check on the package database. I couldn't figure out the mechanism that a) causes the error, and that b) would allow me to fix it properly. What am I missing about implicit runtime dependency handling for the selected libc? Thanks, Heinz
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#48210): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/48210 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/70267979/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
