Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] meta: u-boot: Prepare for newer versions

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>]

On 25.11.21 17:27, vijai kumar wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 12:12 PM vijai kumar
> <vijaikumar.kanagarajan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 3:24 PM Gylstorff Quirin
>> <quirin.gylstorff@siemens.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 11/22/21 4:26 PM, Vijai Kumar K wrote:
>>>> Newer versions of u-boot require libssl-dev:native for compilation.
>>>> It also needs libssl-dev of the host architecture for cross compilation
>>>> of tools.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Vijai Kumar K <Vijaikumar_Kanagarajan@mentor.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-custom.inc | 4 +++-
>>>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-custom.inc b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-custom.inc
>>>> index 5198809..cfae0e2 100644
>>>> --- a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-custom.inc
>>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-custom.inc
>>>> @@ -41,7 +41,9 @@ python() {
>>>>               d.setVar('U_BOOT_BUILD_PROFILES_remove', "config")
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>> -DEBIAN_BUILD_DEPENDS ?= "bc, bison, flex, device-tree-compiler, git"
>>>> +DEBIAN_BUILD_DEPENDS ?= "bc, bison, flex, device-tree-compiler, git, libssl-dev:native"
>>>> +DEBIAN_BUILD_DEPENDS += "${@', libssl-dev' \
>>>> +     if bb.utils.contains('U_BOOT_BUILD_PROFILES', 'tools', 1, 0, d) else ''}"
>>>
>>> Is there are reason why you didn't use `Build-Depends syntax extension`
>>> from[1]?
>>>
>> Hi Quirin,
>>
>> Yes. There was. The previous version of patch depends on
>> ISAR_CROSS_COMPILE as well.
>>
>> Guess there is nothing stopping us now. But, wondering if we can start
>> introducing it via some
>> example app with some documentation so that basic users are not
>> puzzled on seeing that line in
>> a recipe.
>>
>> Also, we could define a whole new variable to help recipe writers to
>> define profiles and seamlessly
>> use them without the need to explicitly export DEB_BUILD_PROFILES in
>> the recipe's dpkg_runbuild
>>
>> Now that we are serious enough, we should probably take care of your
>> earlier comment
>> as well on following the standard. So that we don't conflict with
>> Debian's predefined variables in case
>> we decided to build a package fetched from apt:// and wanted to make
>> use of its profile settings.
>>
>> Still need to look further but these are my initial thoughts. I could
>> probably send some patches for review in
>> coming days.
>>
>> For now, maybe we should call it and use pkg.uboot.tools instead of
>> tools here so that we don't
>> find something in that implementation that requires us to change this
>> in future, possibly breaking
>> u-boot / or the need to provide compatibility.
>>
>> Thoughts?
> 
> OTOH, This could still go in. Since the design I am thinking of is not
> finalized and might take some discussions in the list, there is no
> point in holding this back.
> 

I think Quirin was just asking for

DEBIAN_BUILD_DEPENDS ?= "bc, bison, flex, device-tree-compiler, git, \
	libssl-dev:native, libssl-dev <tools>"

rather than using bitbake logic. If that also works, would be more elegant.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, T RDA IOT
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux