merged. Bruce -- - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II

<richard.purdie@...> wrote: That would be preferable on my end, since these recipes that depend on seccomp unconditionally, are also incompatible with that same set of hosts (I state

The reason for the distro_feature is to have a way to configure multiple packageconfigs on/off centrally. Some platforms don't support seccomp at all (riscv/arc) so forcing it on everywhere isn't

On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bruce Ashfield via lists.yoctoproject.org <bruce.ashfield=gmail.com@...> wrote: I still don't have a better solution to this, and while I see

Instead of installing binaries and patching the makefiles to run external= commands, simply build ifdef using BUILD_CC instead of CC. This patch is now upstreamable, the recipe is less complicated,

Remove COMPATIBLE_HOST, whilst this is an x86 assembler there's nothing t= o stop you building it on or for arm64 and assembling x86 code. Override INEXE so that binaries are not stripped and remove

On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 11:18 AM Bruce Ashfield via lists.yoctoproject.org <bruce.ashfield=gmail.com@...> wrote: And for clarity, I realize that the systemd recipe checks for

Yes .. exactly :D That is the core of what I was asking. A package that is now in core, why is it only enabled by a distro feature ? That is causing the proliferation of checks in meta-virt (and

I was getting the following when passing `--machinesmymachine`: ``` ERROR: Nothing PROVIDES 'libseccomp' (but meta-virtualization/recipes-containers/podman/podman_git.bb,

AB would use the new default DISTRO_FEATURES which already contain seccomp.

https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/121/builds/110 Says green... Obviously we just tweak the css :) Cheers, Richard

I've disagreed with check-layer before (and we've changed how it works) That being said, the layer is checked on the AB, and Richard hasn't reported any issues. So clearly there's something wrong

Right, I understand how/why it works like this .. but it is super clunky when we can't just depend on something that is now in core, without needing to sprinkle distro checks everywhere. As the list

This change is correct, libseccomp still requires seccomp in DISTRO_FEATURES, so anything depending on it should have the same restriction. seccomp is now in default DISTRO_FEATURES, but not through

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 3:45 PM Bruce Ashfield via lists.yoctoproject.org <bruce.ashfield=gmail.com@...> wrote: aha. never mind, I misread the change. That being said, I honestly

What branch are you working with ? Now that seccomp is in core, we no longer have those restrictions, so I assume this is on an older branch ? Bruce -- - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer,

The libseccomp package is only available if seccomp is in DISTRO_FEATURES. Signed-off-by: Diego Sueiro <diego.sueiro@...> --- recipes-networking/slirp4netns/slirp4netns_0.4.1.bb | 3 +++ 1 file

Signed-off-by: Diego Sueiro <diego.sueiro@...> --- recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-container.bb | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git

The libseccomp package is only available if seccomp is in DISTRO_FEATURES. Signed-off-by: Diego Sueiro <diego.sueiro@...> --- recipes-containers/podman/podman_git.bb | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3