[OE-core] Is a dependency on hostperl-runtime-native actually useful?

[Andre McCurdy]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-07-30 at 14:44 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote:
>> Currently the openssl 1.0 recipe defines a dependency on
>> hostperl-runtime-native and the openssl 1.1 recipe does not. Both run
>> "perl ./Configure ..." as part of do_configure().
>>
>> Since hostperl-runtime-native is included in ASSUME_PROVIDED, is it
>> really useful for the openssl 1.0 recipe to list it in DEPENDS?
>>
>> ie is the openssl 1.0 recipe being unnecessarily complex or is the
>> openssl 1.1 recipe being too simplistic?
>
> It is useful for things to list their dependencies and we did have an
> effort to actually list things out so we know ASSUME_PROVIDED is
> correct. This means we can spot areas we might be able to trim back
> dependencies (amongst other reasons).
>
> With the introduction of HOSTTOOLS, its perhaps less needed than it was
> but in principle it is still useful to know which things need a given
> item, particularly where its more unusual. I'd still be interested in
> trying to cut back HOSTTOOLS a bit more.
>
> The 1.1 recipe was pretty heavily cut back, probably too much so based
> on some of the patches we've been getting...

Thanks. Is there an obvious reason why both recipes shouldn't be using
perl-native rather than hostperl-runtime-native? Building with
perl-native seems to work fine.