On 04/09/2014 05:42 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 14:41 +0800, Ming Liu wrote:
On 04/08/2014 06:03 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Tue, 2014-04-08 at 10:27 +0800, Ming Liu wrote:
On 04/07/2014 07:36 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 19:27 +0800, Ming Liu wrote:
In most cases binconfig files conflict among multilib packages, to avoid
that, use update-alternatives link *-config from real path with a
PACKAGE_ARCH suffix.
Signed-off-by: Ming Liu <ming....@windriver.com>
---
meta/classes/binconfig.bbclass | 65
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
This isn't going in, its complex and supports a minority use case.
binconfig should be dying out, not being extended and shored up like
this.
I'd also add this patch is buggy, its pure luck that update-alternatives
is available at rootfs generation time since its not in a visible
dependency.
So going forward I'd like to see patches which simply delete binconfig
scripts. Where there isn't a .pc alternative we should be adding them
and pushing them upstream.
Did you mean we'd better remove all *-config scripts, insteaded by
providing .pc files, and send the changes to all upstreams providing and
using *-config? That seems a huge work and we need co-operate with a lot
of projects.
Basically, yes, that is what I mean. I might be wrong but I don't think
there are that many projects which don't ship .pc files now and just
have a binconfig as a backup.
Yes, I also noticed that many of them are providing .pc files as well as
binconfig as a backup, so I think there must be reasons binconfig
remained in their projects, that might be for compliable considering,
so I am not sure they would like to remove them from their projects, but
I can try to ping them. Nevertheless, the conflicts still exist, we just
leave them here so far?
I'm thinking we should start deleting the -config files at do_install
time where we know a good .pc file exists and remove the binconfig
inherit. If this causes any problem in software using the package, we
should fix those to use pkgconfig.
Over time the conflicts will stop existing since the binconfig class
will not be used anywhere.
Yes, that's a feasible solution, but it needs a lot of testing works,
unfortunately, I am a little busy with my daily work recently and cant
handle it parallelly, so I'd like to file a bug in Yocto, see if anybody
like to take it, or I will do it when I can tear myself away from work
later.
//Ming Liu
Cheers,
Richard
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
