Question about bluez4 and PROVIDES_append_angstrom

Question about bluez4 and PROVIDES_append_angstrom

[Marco Cavallini]

Hello,
first of all I must say that I am not a OE expert and I'd like to learn
and understand, so please apologize if my question is too silly for most
of you :-)

I am quite confused about a few lines I found into the following files.
The result of these lines faced me to errors using KaeilOS distro.

This modification looks (to me) related to bluez4 and Angstrom only and
I wonder why some package recipes (bluez4*.bb) contains some lines that
strictly ties them to Angstrom distribution breaking other distributions.

Files I found are the following:
recipes/bluez/bluez4_4.35.bb:PROVIDES_append_angstrom =
 " bluez-utils bluez-libs"
recipes/bluez/bluez4_4.37.bb:PROVIDES_append_angstrom =
 " bluez-utils bluez-libs"
recipes/bluez/bluez4.inc:PROVIDES_append_angstrom =
 " bluez-utils-dbus bluez-utils bluez-libs"

Lines are similar to these:
# For angstrom we want this to replace at least bluez-libs
PROVIDES_append_angstrom = " bluez-utils-dbus bluez-utils bluez-libs"
RPROVIDES_bluez4-dev_angstrom = "bluez-libs-dev"

My question is: why these lines are not into angstrom*.bb distro recipe
making bluez*.bb distro-independent (agnostic)?

Thank you in advance for your hints.

/marco

Re: Question about bluez4 and PROVIDES_append_angstrom

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 09:24:07PM +0200, Marco Cavallini wrote:
> Hello,
> first of all I must say that I am not a OE expert and I'd like to learn
> and understand, so please apologize if my question is too silly for most
> of you :-)
> 
> I am quite confused about a few lines I found into the following files.
> The result of these lines faced me to errors using KaeilOS distro.
> 
> This modification looks (to me) related to bluez4 and Angstrom only and
> I wonder why some package recipes (bluez4*.bb) contains some lines that
> strictly ties them to Angstrom distribution breaking other distributions.

Can you please be more specific as to what is broken for your distribution?

> Files I found are the following:
> recipes/bluez/bluez4_4.35.bb:PROVIDES_append_angstrom =
>  " bluez-utils bluez-libs"
> recipes/bluez/bluez4_4.37.bb:PROVIDES_append_angstrom =
>  " bluez-utils bluez-libs"
> recipes/bluez/bluez4.inc:PROVIDES_append_angstrom =
>  " bluez-utils-dbus bluez-utils bluez-libs"
> 
> Lines are similar to these:
> # For angstrom we want this to replace at least bluez-libs
> PROVIDES_append_angstrom = " bluez-utils-dbus bluez-utils bluez-libs"
> RPROVIDES_bluez4-dev_angstrom = "bluez-libs-dev"
> 
> My question is: why these lines are not into angstrom*.bb distro recipe
> making bluez*.bb distro-independent (agnostic)?
> 
> Thank you in advance for your hints.

PROVIDES_append_angstrom is an override in bluez4 recipe specific to Angstrom. 
For other distributions it won't do anything. For Angstrom, it will _extend_ 
the default PROVIDES variable with extra values.

It's pretty standard to see small alterations for specific machines or distros 
in recipes, when most of the recipe is still common.

-- 
Denys

Re: Question about bluez4 and PROVIDES_append_angstrom

[Koen Kooi]

On 22-10-09 21:24, Marco Cavallini wrote:

> This modification looks (to me) related to bluez4 and Angstrom only and
> I wonder why some package recipes (bluez4*.bb) contains some lines that
> strictly ties them to Angstrom distribution breaking other distributions.
>
> Files I found are the following:
> recipes/bluez/bluez4_4.35.bb:PROVIDES_append_angstrom =
>   " bluez-utils bluez-libs"
> recipes/bluez/bluez4_4.37.bb:PROVIDES_append_angstrom =
>   " bluez-utils bluez-libs"
> recipes/bluez/bluez4.inc:PROVIDES_append_angstrom =
>   " bluez-utils-dbus bluez-utils bluez-libs"

It would only 'break' for 'other' distros if they manually enable 
'angstrom' as override. If they do so, they do it at their own risk.
Some grepping shows only DISTRO=openmoko does that and I haven't heard 
any complaints about bluez from those users.
Also, that override only works if you set a PREFERRED_PROVIDER as well.

Having said that, why do you keep blaming angstrom for kaelios problems? 
I keep getting reports (second or third hand info, I admit) about you 
badmouthing angstrom on IRC, which seems to be in fashion lately, but I 
would prefer people to do badmouthing with *actual* problems instead of 
projecting their own. It's not angstroms fault if you missed a few lines 
when copy/pasting from it.

Koen