On 2016年01月20日 15:49, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 14:10 +0800, Jian Liu wrote:
linux-libc-headers-dbg is empty and unset ALLOW_EMPTY
for this sub-package.
Signed-off-by: Jian Liu <jian....@windriver.com>
diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/linux-libc-headers/linux-libc
-headers.inc b/meta/recipes-kernel/linux-libc-headers/linux-libc
-headers.inc
index 2ba6ed5..75f6899 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-kernel/linux-libc-headers/linux-libc-headers.inc
+++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/linux-libc-headers/linux-libc-headers.inc
@@ -76,3 +76,5 @@ RRECOMMENDS_${PN}-dbg = "${PN}-dev (=
${EXTENDPKGV})"
INHIBIT_DEFAULT_DEPS = "1"
DEPENDS += "unifdef-native"
+
+ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}-dbg = "0"
It may be empty but our packaging criteria say we always generate a dbg
package since they can be part of dependency chains and we're
interested in the dependencies.
I appreciate in this case, the libc-headers are a corner case at the
end of the chains so you could argue this one can be skipped for
packaging but the system does assume all -dbg packages exist so I'd
prefer to leave this alone, unless its part of a bigger picture rethink
about -dbg packages.
I see
Thanks very much for reminding me this.
Cheers,
Richard
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
