| Message ID | 1474808171-5652-1-git-send-email-yann.morin.1998@free.fr |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
On 25-09-16 14:56, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Finding the packages that select another one in a specific configuration > is not very trivial: > > - when optional, the dependency is not expressed in Kconfig > > - looking at the .mk files is not very nice. If I understand correctly, the idea is to answer the question "why is package foo built?", right? It would make sense to also add a foo-graph-rdepends, because often you'll want the transitive dependencies as well and it's always nice to have it in a graph. But this patch is of course a prerequisite of that feature. > > Introduce a way to dump reverse dependencies of packages, i.e. the list > of packages that directly depend on that package. Like for direct > dependencies, we limit the list to the first-order reverse dependencies. > > Document it in the main help; use the opportunity to also docuemnt document > foo-show-depends. > > Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> Reviewed-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be> > --- > Makefile | 2 ++ > package/pkg-generic.mk | 7 +++++++ > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > index 5e4daef..3039983 100644 > --- a/Makefile > +++ b/Makefile > @@ -943,6 +943,8 @@ help: > @echo ' <pkg>-depends - Build <pkg>'\''s dependencies' > @echo ' <pkg>-configure - Build <pkg> up to the configure step' > @echo ' <pkg>-build - Build <pkg> up to the build step' > + @echo ' <pkg>-show-depends - List packages on which <pkg> depends' > + @echo ' <pkg>-show-rdepends - List packages which have <pkg> as a dependency' > @echo ' <pkg>-graph-depends - Generate a graph of <pkg>'\''s dependencies' > @echo ' <pkg>-dirclean - Remove <pkg> build directory' > @echo ' <pkg>-reconfigure - Restart the build from the configure step' > diff --git a/package/pkg-generic.mk b/package/pkg-generic.mk > index 68ead3d..779f294 100644 > --- a/package/pkg-generic.mk > +++ b/package/pkg-generic.mk > @@ -523,6 +523,10 @@ $(2)_FINAL_DEPENDENCIES = $$(sort $$($(2)_DEPENDENCIES)) > $(2)_FINAL_PATCH_DEPENDENCIES = $$(sort $$($(2)_PATCH_DEPENDENCIES)) > $(2)_FINAL_ALL_DEPENDENCIES = $$(sort $$($(2)_FINAL_DEPENDENCIES) $$($(2)_FINAL_PATCH_DEPENDENCIES)) > > +# Register package as a reverse-dependencies of all its dependencies > +$$(eval $$(foreach p,$$($(2)_FINAL_ALL_DEPENDENCIES),\ > + $$(call UPPERCASE,$$(p))_RDEPENDENCIES += $(1)$$(sep))) > + > $(2)_INSTALL_STAGING ?= NO > $(2)_INSTALL_IMAGES ?= NO > $(2)_INSTALL_TARGET ?= YES > @@ -698,6 +702,9 @@ $(1)-show-version: > $(1)-show-depends: > @echo $$($(2)_FINAL_ALL_DEPENDENCIES) > > +$(1)-show-rdepends: > + @echo $$($(2)_RDEPENDENCIES) > + > $(1)-graph-depends: graph-depends-requirements > @$$(INSTALL) -d $$(GRAPHS_DIR) > @cd "$$(CONFIG_DIR)"; \ >
On 2016-09-27 22:40 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: > > > On 25-09-16 14:56, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > > Finding the packages that select another one in a specific configuration > > is not very trivial: > > > > - when optional, the dependency is not expressed in Kconfig > > > > - looking at the .mk files is not very nice. > > If I understand correctly, the idea is to answer the question "why is package > foo built?", right? Right. In my use-case, that was "what do I need to disable so I can disable that broken package?". > It would make sense to also add a foo-graph-rdepends, because often you'll want > the transitive dependencies as well and it's always nice to have it in a graph. Yup, planned. But not trivial... > But this patch is of course a prerequisite of that feature. And it proved already usefull in its own right. ;-) > > Introduce a way to dump reverse dependencies of packages, i.e. the list > > of packages that directly depend on that package. Like for direct > > dependencies, we limit the list to the first-order reverse dependencies. > > > > Document it in the main help; use the opportunity to also docuemnt > document Boaf... One typo more, one typo less... I stopped countign a long time ago! ;-) > > foo-show-depends. > > > > Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> > > Reviewed-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be> Thanks! Regards, Yann E. MORIN. > > --- > > Makefile | 2 ++ > > package/pkg-generic.mk | 7 +++++++ > > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > > index 5e4daef..3039983 100644 > > --- a/Makefile > > +++ b/Makefile > > @@ -943,6 +943,8 @@ help: > > @echo ' <pkg>-depends - Build <pkg>'\''s dependencies' > > @echo ' <pkg>-configure - Build <pkg> up to the configure step' > > @echo ' <pkg>-build - Build <pkg> up to the build step' > > + @echo ' <pkg>-show-depends - List packages on which <pkg> depends' > > + @echo ' <pkg>-show-rdepends - List packages which have <pkg> as a dependency' > > @echo ' <pkg>-graph-depends - Generate a graph of <pkg>'\''s dependencies' > > @echo ' <pkg>-dirclean - Remove <pkg> build directory' > > @echo ' <pkg>-reconfigure - Restart the build from the configure step' > > diff --git a/package/pkg-generic.mk b/package/pkg-generic.mk > > index 68ead3d..779f294 100644 > > --- a/package/pkg-generic.mk > > +++ b/package/pkg-generic.mk > > @@ -523,6 +523,10 @@ $(2)_FINAL_DEPENDENCIES = $$(sort $$($(2)_DEPENDENCIES)) > > $(2)_FINAL_PATCH_DEPENDENCIES = $$(sort $$($(2)_PATCH_DEPENDENCIES)) > > $(2)_FINAL_ALL_DEPENDENCIES = $$(sort $$($(2)_FINAL_DEPENDENCIES) $$($(2)_FINAL_PATCH_DEPENDENCIES)) > > > > +# Register package as a reverse-dependencies of all its dependencies > > +$$(eval $$(foreach p,$$($(2)_FINAL_ALL_DEPENDENCIES),\ > > + $$(call UPPERCASE,$$(p))_RDEPENDENCIES += $(1)$$(sep))) > > + > > $(2)_INSTALL_STAGING ?= NO > > $(2)_INSTALL_IMAGES ?= NO > > $(2)_INSTALL_TARGET ?= YES > > @@ -698,6 +702,9 @@ $(1)-show-version: > > $(1)-show-depends: > > @echo $$($(2)_FINAL_ALL_DEPENDENCIES) > > > > +$(1)-show-rdepends: > > + @echo $$($(2)_RDEPENDENCIES) > > + > > $(1)-graph-depends: graph-depends-requirements > > @$$(INSTALL) -d $$(GRAPHS_DIR) > > @cd "$$(CONFIG_DIR)"; \ > > > > -- > Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be > Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 > Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be > G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven > LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle > GPG fingerprint: 7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF
On 27-09-16 23:32, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > On 2016-09-27 22:40 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: >> > >> > >> > On 25-09-16 14:56, Yann E. MORIN wrote: >>> > > Finding the packages that select another one in a specific configuration >>> > > is not very trivial: >>> > > >>> > > - when optional, the dependency is not expressed in Kconfig >>> > > >>> > > - looking at the .mk files is not very nice. >> > >> > If I understand correctly, the idea is to answer the question "why is package >> > foo built?", right? > Right. In my use-case, that was "what do I need to disable so I can > disable that broken package?". > >> > It would make sense to also add a foo-graph-rdepends, because often you'll want >> > the transitive dependencies as well and it's always nice to have it in a graph. > Yup, planned. But not trivial... No? Isn't it just calling foo-show-rdepends from graph-depends? > >> > But this patch is of course a prerequisite of that feature. > And it proved already usefull in its own right. ;-) > >>> > > Introduce a way to dump reverse dependencies of packages, i.e. the list >>> > > of packages that directly depend on that package. Like for direct >>> > > dependencies, we limit the list to the first-order reverse dependencies. >>> > > >>> > > Document it in the main help; use the opportunity to also docuemnt >> > document > Boaf... One typo more, one typo less... I stopped countign a long time > ago! ;-) countign, really? :-P Regards, Arnout
Arnout, All, On 2016-09-28 00:02 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: > On 27-09-16 23:32, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > > On 2016-09-27 22:40 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: > >> > > >> > > >> > On 25-09-16 14:56, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > >>> > > Finding the packages that select another one in a specific configuration > >>> > > is not very trivial: > >>> > > > >>> > > - when optional, the dependency is not expressed in Kconfig > >>> > > > >>> > > - looking at the .mk files is not very nice. > >> > > >> > If I understand correctly, the idea is to answer the question "why is package > >> > foo built?", right? > > Right. In my use-case, that was "what do I need to disable so I can > > disable that broken package?". > > > >> > It would make sense to also add a foo-graph-rdepends, because often you'll want > >> > the transitive dependencies as well and it's always nice to have it in a graph. > > Yup, planned. But not trivial... > > No? Isn't it just calling foo-show-rdepends from graph-depends? It would seem it would be that easy, but not really. I don;t recall the details, but one thing is that we can't easily do an rdepends graph for 'all' in the current state: we'd need to be able to extract all packages that have no dependencies (i.e. leaf packages) so that we could construct the 'all' node for rdepends. Hmm.. Or do we have to? We could construct that list... Lemme think... Of course, we could limit the feature to just graphing the rdeps of a single package. That would not be overly complex, as you said. But I was trying to mimick graph-depends into graph-rdepends, so they would be symetrical... Well, anyway, it's not at the top of my TODO list... ;-) Regards, Yann E. MORIN. > >> > But this patch is of course a prerequisite of that feature. > > And it proved already usefull in its own right. ;-) > > > >>> > > Introduce a way to dump reverse dependencies of packages, i.e. the list > >>> > > of packages that directly depend on that package. Like for direct > >>> > > dependencies, we limit the list to the first-order reverse dependencies. > >>> > > > >>> > > Document it in the main help; use the opportunity to also docuemnt > >> > document > > Boaf... One typo more, one typo less... I stopped countign a long time > > ago! ;-) > > countign, really? :-P > > > Regards, > Arnout > > -- > Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be > Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 > Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be > G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven > LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle > GPG fingerprint: 7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF
On 28-09-16 00:10, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Arnout, All, > > On 2016-09-28 00:02 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: >> > On 27-09-16 23:32, Yann E. MORIN wrote: >>> > > On 2016-09-27 22:40 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> > On 25-09-16 14:56, Yann E. MORIN wrote: >>>>>>> > >>> > > Finding the packages that select another one in a specific configuration >>>>>>> > >>> > > is not very trivial: >>>>>>> > >>> > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > - when optional, the dependency is not expressed in Kconfig >>>>>>> > >>> > > >>>>>>> > >>> > > - looking at the .mk files is not very nice. >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> > If I understand correctly, the idea is to answer the question "why is package >>>>> > >> > foo built?", right? >>> > > Right. In my use-case, that was "what do I need to disable so I can >>> > > disable that broken package?". >>> > > >>>>> > >> > It would make sense to also add a foo-graph-rdepends, because often you'll want >>>>> > >> > the transitive dependencies as well and it's always nice to have it in a graph. >>> > > Yup, planned. But not trivial... >> > >> > No? Isn't it just calling foo-show-rdepends from graph-depends? > It would seem it would be that easy, but not really. > > I don;t recall the details, but one thing is that we can't easily do an > rdepends graph for 'all' in the current state: we'd need to be able to > extract all packages that have no dependencies (i.e. leaf packages) so > that we could construct the 'all' node for rdepends. graph-rdepends would be exactly the same as graph-depends. Only foo-graph-rdepends is relevant. Regards, Arnout > > Hmm.. Or do we have to? We could construct that list... Lemme think... > > Of course, we could limit the feature to just graphing the rdeps of a > single package. That would not be overly complex, as you said. > > But I was trying to mimick graph-depends into graph-rdepends, so they > would be symetrical... > > Well, anyway, it's not at the top of my TODO list... ;-)
Hello, On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 14:56:11 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Finding the packages that select another one in a specific configuration > is not very trivial: > > - when optional, the dependency is not expressed in Kconfig > > - looking at the .mk files is not very nice. > > Introduce a way to dump reverse dependencies of packages, i.e. the list > of packages that directly depend on that package. Like for direct > dependencies, we limit the list to the first-order reverse dependencies. > > Document it in the main help; use the opportunity to also docuemnt > foo-show-depends. > > Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> I was about to apply this patch, but after testing it, I'm a little bit skeptical. The current <foo>-show-depends only shows the dependencies according to the current configuration. So, if a package A has: A_DEPENDENCIES = B ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_C),y) A_DEPENDENCNIES += C endif and BR2_PACKAGE_C is not enabled, then "make A-show-depends" will only show "B" but not C. However, make <foo>-show-rdepends shows all possible reverse dependencies, even the ones that are not enabled in the current configuration. So let's say you have packages A, B, C and D. a.mk: A_DEPENDENCIES = D b.mk: B_DEPENDENCIES = D c.mk: ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_C_SUPPORT_FOR_D),y) C_DEPENDENCIES += D endif with: BR2_PACKAGE_A=y # BR2_PACKAGE_B is not set # BR2_PACKAGE_C is not set BR2_PACKAGE_D=y Then, doing: make D-show-rdepends will list both A and B, even if: 1/ B is not enabled in the current configuration 2/ C could potentially be a reverse dependency of A So in the end, I find the semantic of this "show-rdepends" a bit weird. It shows reverse dependencies, some according to the current configuration, some not. It feels a bit weird :/ Best regards, Thomas
Thomas, All, On 2016-10-23 15:23 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly: > On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 14:56:11 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > > Finding the packages that select another one in a specific configuration > > is not very trivial: > > > > - when optional, the dependency is not expressed in Kconfig > > > > - looking at the .mk files is not very nice. > > > > Introduce a way to dump reverse dependencies of packages, i.e. the list > > of packages that directly depend on that package. Like for direct > > dependencies, we limit the list to the first-order reverse dependencies. > > > > Document it in the main help; use the opportunity to also docuemnt > > foo-show-depends. > > > > Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> > > I was about to apply this patch, but after testing it, I'm a little bit > skeptical. [--SNIP--] > So in the end, I find the semantic of this "show-rdepends" a bit weird. > It shows reverse dependencies, some according to the current > configuration, some not. Right, good catch. I've fixed it here now to take this into account. It should now match the behaviour of -show-depends. I'll spin it soon. Thanks! :-) Regards, Yann E. MORIN.
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 5e4daef..3039983 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -943,6 +943,8 @@ help: @echo ' <pkg>-depends - Build <pkg>'\''s dependencies' @echo ' <pkg>-configure - Build <pkg> up to the configure step' @echo ' <pkg>-build - Build <pkg> up to the build step' + @echo ' <pkg>-show-depends - List packages on which <pkg> depends' + @echo ' <pkg>-show-rdepends - List packages which have <pkg> as a dependency' @echo ' <pkg>-graph-depends - Generate a graph of <pkg>'\''s dependencies' @echo ' <pkg>-dirclean - Remove <pkg> build directory' @echo ' <pkg>-reconfigure - Restart the build from the configure step' diff --git a/package/pkg-generic.mk b/package/pkg-generic.mk index 68ead3d..779f294 100644 --- a/package/pkg-generic.mk +++ b/package/pkg-generic.mk @@ -523,6 +523,10 @@ $(2)_FINAL_DEPENDENCIES = $$(sort $$($(2)_DEPENDENCIES)) $(2)_FINAL_PATCH_DEPENDENCIES = $$(sort $$($(2)_PATCH_DEPENDENCIES)) $(2)_FINAL_ALL_DEPENDENCIES = $$(sort $$($(2)_FINAL_DEPENDENCIES) $$($(2)_FINAL_PATCH_DEPENDENCIES)) +# Register package as a reverse-dependencies of all its dependencies +$$(eval $$(foreach p,$$($(2)_FINAL_ALL_DEPENDENCIES),\ + $$(call UPPERCASE,$$(p))_RDEPENDENCIES += $(1)$$(sep))) + $(2)_INSTALL_STAGING ?= NO $(2)_INSTALL_IMAGES ?= NO $(2)_INSTALL_TARGET ?= YES @@ -698,6 +702,9 @@ $(1)-show-version: $(1)-show-depends: @echo $$($(2)_FINAL_ALL_DEPENDENCIES) +$(1)-show-rdepends: + @echo $$($(2)_RDEPENDENCIES) + $(1)-graph-depends: graph-depends-requirements @$$(INSTALL) -d $$(GRAPHS_DIR) @cd "$$(CONFIG_DIR)"; \
Finding the packages that select another one in a specific configuration is not very trivial: - when optional, the dependency is not expressed in Kconfig - looking at the .mk files is not very nice. Introduce a way to dump reverse dependencies of packages, i.e. the list of packages that directly depend on that package. Like for direct dependencies, we limit the list to the first-order reverse dependencies. Document it in the main help; use the opportunity to also docuemnt foo-show-depends. Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> --- Makefile | 2 ++ package/pkg-generic.mk | 7 +++++++ 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)