On Fri, 2025-02-28 at 11:35 +0100, Jörg Sommer wrote: > Richard Purdie schrieb am Fr 28. Feb, 10:20 (+0000): > > DISTRO_FEATURES are high level policy controls, not "this should be > > included or excluded" controls. For example "pam" controls whether the > > access control modules are configured/used, not whether libpam is or is > > not included. > > But it controls if other packages (e.g. systemd) enable pam support or not. > The same goes with ldconfig: Should ldconfig support in the packages be > enabled (which would pull-in ldconfig as dependency). > > > For ldconfig, as I remember, the distro config was about whether to > > include "ldconfig" calls after installing libraries and whether to use the > > ld cache. > > If the feature is only about enabling code in the postinst script, than we > should find a better description of the feature
I think the description needs improving and I think we'd take patches to do that. > > ldconfig: Include support for ldconfig and ld.so.conf on the target. > > https://docs.yoctoproject.org/ref-manual/features.html > > > Packages being installed or not is an image level decision, not distro > > level. > > Yes, that's also my understanding. But enabling some features (e.g. x11 > support) leads to recipes set DEPENDS on libs and this leads to the > installation of some packages. So DISTRO_FEATURES influence indirectly what > gets into the image. The key word is indirectly. Where things have a hard dependency on something, they do include that dependency and it isn't conditional on a distro feature. In this case, the usage is tangential to what the DISTRO_FEATURE was designed for (ld cache). I do agree ldconfig is optional so RRECOMMENDS seems better than a hard RDEPENDS though. > > In this case, perhaps we should drop the RDEPENDS to a RRECOMMENDS? > > This would be helpful to remove ldconfig, if django is installed. > > But the main question is still open: Why should I want ldconfig and remove > it from DISTRO_FEATURES? What is this use case? It is being used to control whether the ld cache is being used or not. That has to be done at a distro wide policy level. Whether ldconfig makes it into the image or not is an indirect effect. We can control the inclusion of ldconfig for ctypes at a package/image level, it isn't a distro config level issue. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#212058): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/212058 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/111283758/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
