From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.multimedia-labs.de ([82.149.226.172]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P7o68-0000Ch-B0 for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:41:49 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.multimedia-labs.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08FED3149FC8 for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:41:14 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.multimedia-labs.de Received: from mail.multimedia-labs.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.multimedia-labs.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id w6GyreqHELAi for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:41:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [172.22.22.60] (ip-109-90-189-193.unitymediagroup.de [109.90.189.193]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.multimedia-labs.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB1EA3149DC9 for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:41:09 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4CBC3255.3040007@opendreambox.org> Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:41:09 +0200 From: Andreas Oberritter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.12) Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <1287353716-27717-1-git-send-email-obi@opendreambox.org> <4CBC1FBE.9020808@opendreambox.org> In-Reply-To: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 82.149.226.172 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: obi@opendreambox.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: [PATCH] libfribidi-0.10.4: update recipe, fix packaging X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 11:41:49 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 10/18/2010 12:48 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: > On 18-10-10 12:21, Andreas Oberritter wrote: >> On 10/18/2010 09:22 AM, Koen Kooi wrote: >>> On 18-10-10 00:15, Andreas Oberritter wrote: >>>> * added LICENSE >>>> * removed configure patch >>>> * use lib_package and binconfig to package all installed files >>> >>> What's the upgrade path? I assume package names have changes due to this. > >> I guess my patch description wasn't clear enough. > >> The previously unpackaged files ${bindir}/fribidi and >> ${bindir}/fribidi-config are now packaged into libfribidi-bin and >> libfribidi-dev, respectively. > >> The only file which moved to a different package is libfribidi.a, from >> libfribidi-static to libfribidi-dev. > > Well, .a files are supposed to go into -static, not into -dev. > >> Does this change require special treatment for upgrades? > > Every time you change packaging you need to make sure upgrade paths are > intact. Especially with libraries. OK, I understand. The problem was that I trusted lib_package to do the right thing. So the real fix would be to add a -static package to lib_package.bbclass and to add RDEPENDS_${PN}-static += "${PN}-dev" somewhere, because static libs don't make much sense without develompent headers, right? Of course, this would create a different problem with upgrades, but I would suspect that the number of users of static libraries on their target machines is relatively small and, because a disappearing static library doesn't create runtime problems, the installation of a new -static package wouldn't impose a huge burden to the user. In case this solution was accepted: What's the policy for changing files like lib_package.bbclass, in order to trigger an update of all relevant packages? To bump every single PR? Regards, Andreas