Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dpkg: move installation of dependencies into dpkg_prepare

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>]

Hi Cedric,

On 2018-09-01 10:44, Cedric Hombourger wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> 
> Please let me know if there is anything that I can help you with
> I was going to review existing documentation and propose updates around 
> recipe creation / APIs
> 

Thanks a lot, I would specifically appreciate your review. I've written 
some changes already and also started a RECIPE-API-CHANGELOG.md from the 
last release onward. Series is currently in CI, I will send later.

Jan

>> On Sep 1, 2018, at 8:58 AM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de 
>> <mailto:jan.kiszka@web.de>> wrote:
>>
>> On 2018-08-31 11:05, [ext] Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> On 2018-08-31 10:41, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>> On 2018-08-31 10:33, chombourger@gmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:chombourger@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 10:28:51 AM UTC+2, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Re-reading the patch with my new knowledge:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2018-08-26 08:21, Cedric Hombourger wrote:
>>>>> > diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/linux-module/module.inc
>>>>> b/meta/recipes-kernel/linux-module/module.inc
>>>>> > index 3075f44..3a3cab1 100644
>>>>> > --- a/meta/recipes-kernel/linux-module/module.inc
>>>>> > +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/linux-module/module.inc
>>>>> > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ AUTOLOAD ?= "0"
>>>>> >
>>>>> > � inherit dpkg
>>>>> >
>>>>> > -dpkg_runbuild_prepend() {
>>>>> > +do_prepare_prepend() {
>>>>>
>>>>> Shouldn't that be dpgk_prepare_append()?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wouldn't it be too late?
>>>>> I am afraid that debian/control wouldn't be complete and prevent 
>>>>> installation of build dependencies
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Right, we need that for the installation...
>>>>
>>>> I was wondering, though, if it wouldn't be cleaner to hook additions 
>>>> to the inner handler.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, all this is not mature yet:
>>>>
>>>> - debianization does not require locking, only the dependency
>>>> installation does
>>>>
>>>> - I'm quite sure something is broken now with dpkg-raw, because there is
>>>> no lock involved, but we can pull packages that way as well
>>>>
>>> Yep, confirmed: We so far installed the dependencies of both regular 
>>> and raw packages in the build script under the lock. Now you pulled 
>>> that installation into deps.sh, but that script is not executed by 
>>> dpkg-raw, nor is there any lock on the related prepare step.
>>> Can we fix this quickly? Or better revert and redo the series (given 
>>> the other issues)?
>>
>> I have to correct myself: dpkg-raw packages only have runtime 
>> dependencies, no Build-Depends. Thus they never installed anything 
>> into the buildchroot and also never used the build script - we are 
>> fine in this regard.
>>
>> I'll write a few patches to address the other issues.
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>> Jan
>>>> - we should cleanly name the steps, as you suggested, so that users know
>>>> what to overwrite / append /prepend
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>