<div dir="ltr">I also need to look at the <span style="font-size:12.8px">UPSTREAM_CHECK_URI for this recipe since it isn't finding the latest version and telling me to update the package.</span></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:02 PM, S. Lockwood-Childs <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sjl@vctlabs.com" target="_blank">sjl@vctlabs.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:17:25PM -0500, Derek Straka wrote:<br>
> I have several customers who have optimized for space and would like to see<br>
> the capability maintained unless core removes the ability to split python<br>
> packages out. They also remove the *.py files in favor of *.pyo files (via<br>
> a custom packaging mechanism). I have automated tests that go through the<br>
> module importing on each of the meta-python packages to ensure it works on<br>
> minimal python installations. When other contributors don't do provide<br>
> that functionality, I either catch it when I do package update or when it<br>
> breaks for one of my customers. I'm fine if you don't want to perform the<br>
> checks yourself and it breaks my use case with missing dependencies, but I<br>
> would prefer that you don't remove the dependencies that are currently in<br>
> place. Thanks.<br>
<br>
</span>Me too -- some of my projects still use NAND for rootfs, where space is tight and<br>
ability to split out python modules is very useful. Thus it is not an unused<br>
feature, though many projects have SD/eMMC for rootfs and those ones generally<br>
will not care about it.<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>