On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 07:55 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 23:44 -0700, Saul Wold wrote:
> > SECTION_${PN}-dev = "devel"
> > ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}-dev = "1"
> > RDEPENDS_${PN}-dev = "${PN} (= ${EXTENDPKGV})"
> >
> > +FILES_${PN}-staticlibs = "${libdir}/*.a ${base_libdir}/*.a"
> > +SECTION_${PN}-staticlibs = "devel"
> > +RDEPENDS_${PN}-staticlibs = "${PN}-dev (= ${EXTENDPV})"
>
> This should be ${EXTENDPKGV}, right?
It should.
I'm also not 100% convinced I like "-staticlibs" vs "-staticdev" as it
doesn't feel consistent.
The user gets exposed to these at the package manager level and will
"xxx install xxx-staticX". The end result they'll get will be the
installation of everything they need for static development (i.e. the
-dev packages will get pulled in for the headers). This means they don't
just result in the static libs as there are dependencies there. From the
user perspective they are therefore packages for static development, not
just the static libraries...
Cheers,
Richard
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
