>-----Original Message-----
>From: Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org>
>Sent: 04 January 2021 11:32
>To: Diego Sueiro <diego.sue...@arm.com>; openembedded-
>c...@lists.openembedded.org
>Cc: nd <n...@arm.com>
>Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v2] u-boot: add /boot and ${sysconfdir} to
>SYSROOT_DIRS
>
>On Mon, 2021-01-04 at 10:56 +0000, Diego Sueiro wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, I missed your message in the IRC and was on holidays just
>> returning today.
>
>No problem, I think we're all catching up after the holidays!
>
>> For example, in trusted-firmware-a recipe in meta-arm (
>> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/meta-arm/recip
>> es-bsp/trusted-firmware-a/trusted-firmware-a.inc
>> ),
>> we have an option to include the u-boot binary (as BL33) in the FIP
>> image. And this is achieved by passing the DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE path.
>>
>> The idea for using the SYSROOT_DIRS is to not depend on u-
>> boot:do_deploy in order to be able to use its generated artifacts. I'm
>> just trying to follow the recommendation listed in the manual:
>> https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/latest/mega-manual/mega-
>manual.html#
>> new-sharing-files-between-recipes
>> .
>>
>> Note that some of these artifacts are not expected to be included in
>> the filesystem.
>>
>> In meta-arm, we are using the SYSROOT_DIRS approach for other firmware
>> related recipes to share files between them.
>>
>> We had some situations (which I don't remember exactly) where
>> dependency cycles occurred between do_deploy tasks when trying to
>> signing or creating wic images, and by using the combination of
>> SYSROOT_DIRS and DEPENDS we managed to overcome these issues.
>
>I think you are reading more into that manual section than is intended.
>For files on the general filesystem, the sysroot is definitely the way to share
>between recipes. For files that are not within the filesystem, I think deploy
>is
>more appropriate. We could improve the docs to mention that.
>
>As such I don't really want to add a mechanism where we confuse those lines
>if we can help it and I am reluctant to take the patch. do_deploy was designed
>for these cases.
>
For some arm based machines we end up generating loads of intermediate binaries
which will be further processed and combined as standalone images, for example.
I think doesn't make sense to have them in the deploy dir since it will make it
polluted and I do much prefer to have a tidy deploy dir with only artifacts for
flashing/update the target, rather than a list of useless artifacts that can't
be used
directly.
And I do agree with you that using the SYSROOT_DIRS for this purpose might lead
to confusion. Is it plausible to come up with a new variable and do_populate
related
tasks to address use cases like the one I described?
>If you can find out more details of the issue you were running into we might
>be able to help figure out how to break the circular dependencies.
>
As soon as I come across this kind of problem I'll let you know.
>Cheers,
>
>Richard
>
Cheers,
Diego Sueiro
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#146352):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/146352
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/79420282/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
