[PATCH] libfribidi-0.10.4: update recipe, fix packaging

[PATCH] libfribidi-0.10.4: update recipe, fix packaging

[Andreas Oberritter]

* added LICENSE
* removed configure patch
* use lib_package and binconfig to package all installed files
* convert to new style staging
* oe-stylize

Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter <obi@opendreambox.org>
---
 recipes/libfribidi/files/libtool-update.patch |   11 --------
 recipes/libfribidi/libfribidi_0.10.4.bb       |   32 +++++++-----------------
 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 recipes/libfribidi/files/libtool-update.patch

diff --git a/recipes/libfribidi/files/libtool-update.patch b/recipes/libfribidi/files/libtool-update.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index c703100..0000000
--- a/recipes/libfribidi/files/libtool-update.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,11 +0,0 @@
---- fribidi-0.10.4/configure.in~	2002-05-19 11:06:48.000000000 +0100
-+++ fribidi-0.10.4/configure.in	2004-08-03 17:42:28.000000000 +0100
-@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@
- AC_PROG_INSTALL
- AC_PROG_LN_S
- AC_PROG_MAKE_SET
--AC_PROG_RANLIB
-+#AC_PROG_RANLIB
- AC_PATH_PROG(SED, sed, $PATH)
- 
- 
diff --git a/recipes/libfribidi/libfribidi_0.10.4.bb b/recipes/libfribidi/libfribidi_0.10.4.bb
index c46909b..b83c484 100644
--- a/recipes/libfribidi/libfribidi_0.10.4.bb
+++ b/recipes/libfribidi/libfribidi_0.10.4.bb
@@ -1,32 +1,20 @@
 DESCRIPTION = "Fribidi library for bidirectional text"
 SECTION = "libs"
 PRIORITY = "optional"
+LICENSE = "LGPLv2.1"
+PR = "r1"
 
-inherit autotools pkgconfig
-
-PR = "r0"
+SRC_URI = "${SOURCEFORGE_MIRROR}/fribidi/fribidi-${PV}.tar.bz2"
+SRC_URI[md5sum] = "0f6e7ecca08e6e108dc06337f5b5cabf"
+SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "f3ecdb9d108bd61ec9394df75f5fd68ba886a8da0863ba6258338893aec6c04f"
 
 S = "${WORKDIR}/fribidi-${PV}"
 
-SRC_URI = "${SOURCEFORGE_MIRROR}/fribidi/fribidi-${PV}.tar.bz2 \
-           file://libtool-update.patch"
-
-#PACKAGES += " ${PN}-bin"
-FILES_${PN} = "${libdir}/lib*.so.*"
-#FILES_${PN}-bin = "${libdir}/uu*"
+inherit autotools lib_package binconfig pkgconfig
 
 do_configure_prepend () {
-# this version of libtool is old - we have to nobble this file to get it to litoolize
-	rm ltconfig
-	rm aclocal.m4
-	rm acinclude.m4
-}
-
-do_stage () {
-	oe_libinstall -a -so -C .libs libfribidi ${STAGING_LIBDIR}
-	autotools_stage_includes
+        # this version of libtool is old - we have to nobble this file to get it to litoolize
+        rm ltconfig
+        rm aclocal.m4
+        rm acinclude.m4
 }
-
-
-SRC_URI[md5sum] = "0f6e7ecca08e6e108dc06337f5b5cabf"
-SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "f3ecdb9d108bd61ec9394df75f5fd68ba886a8da0863ba6258338893aec6c04f"
-- 
1.7.1

Re: [PATCH] libfribidi-0.10.4: update recipe, fix packaging

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

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.

regards,

Koen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFMu/W3MkyGM64RGpERAkpjAKCtQMUvowc4x+DUsLDfLK/+3I2ROQCcCHMw
yTY9uasA19RbeUfbyifckYc=
=+r2i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [PATCH] libfribidi-0.10.4: update recipe, fix packaging

[Andreas Oberritter]

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.

Does this change require special treatment for upgrades?

Regards,
Andreas

Re: [PATCH] libfribidi-0.10.4: update recipe, fix packaging

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

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.

regards,

Koen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFMvCYQMkyGM64RGpERAoo5AJ9+DLGIs6fcpMFzd0zu4rHZ1R6WnwCfW8MM
Td+T9s7UaTtrWvUyrH/0wCc=
=4fBZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [PATCH] libfribidi-0.10.4: update recipe, fix packaging

[Andreas Oberritter]

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

[RFC] update lib_package.bbclass

[Andreas Oberritter]

On 10/18/2010 01:41 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> On 10/18/2010 12:48 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>> Well, .a files are supposed to go into -static, not into -dev.
>>

[...]

> 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?

I looked deeper into lib_package.bbclass and its history and I saw that
it wasn't updated very often during the last years. It still uses
hardcoded paths and doesn't include some files which would get packaged
without lib_package.bbclass.

What lib_package.bbclass does now, compared to the defaults from
bitbake.conf:

1.) It adds ${libdir}/*.a and /lib/*.a to FILES_${PN}-dev.

2.) It adds ${bindir}/*-config to FILES_${PN}-dev.

3.) It creates an additional package ${PN}-bin, which contains all other
executables: ${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* /bin/* /sbin/*

4.) It doesn't package any of the following:
            ${datadir}/pixmaps ${datadir}/applications \
            ${datadir}/idl ${datadir}/omf ${datadir}/sounds \
            ${libdir}/bonobo/servers

In f624db1d3c7de3fcb3a9e76d388a8f9f8fedcf5c, Koen introduced
${PN}-static packages, but lib_package.bbclass has not been updated
since then, which was one year ago.

Although it packages ${bindir}/*-config into FILES_${PN}-dev, it does
not include the required mangling applied by binconfig.bbclass. I think
that's wrong and just causes unnecessary confusion. IMO, lib_package
should either inherit binconfig or not, but leave FILES_${PN}-dev
untouched in any case.

Leaving FILES_${PN}-dev untouched would also allow lib_package to
automatically inherit some updates from bitbake.conf and to create
non-empty ${PN}-static packages.

I don't know whether #4 should be changed or whether those directories
were left out on purpose.

So, my current proposal looks like this:

-
inherit binconfig	# ... or not

PACKAGES += "${PN}-bin"

FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir}/* ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
            ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
            ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
            ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}/*"

FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* \
                ${base_bindir}/* ${base_sbindir}/*"
-

Any opinions?

Regards,
Andreas

Re: [RFC] update lib_package.bbclass

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 19-10-10 20:01, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> On 10/18/2010 01:41 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>> On 10/18/2010 12:48 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, .a files are supposed to go into -static, not into -dev.
>>>
> 
> [...]
> 
>> 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?
> 
> I looked deeper into lib_package.bbclass and its history and I saw that
> it wasn't updated very often during the last years. It still uses
> hardcoded paths and doesn't include some files which would get packaged
> without lib_package.bbclass.
> 
> What lib_package.bbclass does now, compared to the defaults from
> bitbake.conf:
> 
> 1.) It adds ${libdir}/*.a and /lib/*.a to FILES_${PN}-dev.
> 
> 2.) It adds ${bindir}/*-config to FILES_${PN}-dev.
> 
> 3.) It creates an additional package ${PN}-bin, which contains all other
> executables: ${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* /bin/* /sbin/*
> 
> 4.) It doesn't package any of the following:
>             ${datadir}/pixmaps ${datadir}/applications \
>             ${datadir}/idl ${datadir}/omf ${datadir}/sounds \
>             ${libdir}/bonobo/servers
> 
> In f624db1d3c7de3fcb3a9e76d388a8f9f8fedcf5c, Koen introduced
> ${PN}-static packages, but lib_package.bbclass has not been updated
> since then, which was one year ago.
> 
> Although it packages ${bindir}/*-config into FILES_${PN}-dev, it does
> not include the required mangling applied by binconfig.bbclass. I think
> that's wrong and just causes unnecessary confusion. IMO, lib_package
> should either inherit binconfig or not, but leave FILES_${PN}-dev
> untouched in any case.
> 
> Leaving FILES_${PN}-dev untouched would also allow lib_package to
> automatically inherit some updates from bitbake.conf and to create
> non-empty ${PN}-static packages.
> 
> I don't know whether #4 should be changed or whether those directories
> were left out on purpose.
> 
> So, my current proposal looks like this:
> 
> -
> inherit binconfig	# ... or not
> 
> PACKAGES += "${PN}-bin"
> 
> FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir}/* ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
>             ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
>             ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
>             ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}/*"
> 
> FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* \
>                 ${base_bindir}/* ${base_sbindir}/*"
> -
> 

How about this one:

inherit binconfig

PACKAGES =+ "${PN}-bin"
FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* \
                   ${base_bindir}* ${base_sbindir}/*"


Does that work for you?

regards,

Koen

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFMvp6FMkyGM64RGpERAmsTAJ0YDhVIcbXL59cei5Jrturv3zn6HwCfXydS
APscbmlBpvYasE+7O+99ksE=
=G5lN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [RFC] update lib_package.bbclass

[Andreas Oberritter]

On 10/20/2010 09:47 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> On 19-10-10 20:01, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>> So, my current proposal looks like this:
> 
>> -
>> inherit binconfig	# ... or not
> 
>> PACKAGES += "${PN}-bin"
> 
>> FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir}/* ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
>>             ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
>>             ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
>>             ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}/*"
> 
>> FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* \
>>                 ${base_bindir}/* ${base_sbindir}/*"
>> -
> 
> 
> How about this one:
> 
> inherit binconfig
> 
> PACKAGES =+ "${PN}-bin"
> FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* \
>                    ${base_bindir}* ${base_sbindir}/*"
> 
> 
> Does that work for you?

This would package ${bindir}/*-config into -bin instead of -dev.

Regards,
Andreas

[PATCH] lib_package.bbclass: fix packaging of static libs, inherit binconfig

[Andreas Oberritter]

* Package ${libdir}/*.a and /lib/*.a into ${PN}-static instead of ${PN}-dev
* Although it packaged ${bindir}/*-config into FILES_${PN}-dev, it did
  not include the required mangling applied by binconfig.bbclass.

Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter <obi@opendreambox.org>
---
 classes/lib_package.bbclass |   17 +++++++++--------
 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/classes/lib_package.bbclass b/classes/lib_package.bbclass
index 82c9370..7e72dc8 100644
--- a/classes/lib_package.bbclass
+++ b/classes/lib_package.bbclass
@@ -1,10 +1,11 @@
+inherit binconfig
+
 PACKAGES += "${PN}-bin"
 
-FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir} ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
-	    ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
-	    ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
-	    ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}"
-FILES_${PN}-dev = "${includedir} ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBSDEV} ${libdir}/*.la \
-		${libdir}/*.a ${libdir}/pkgconfig /lib/*.a /lib/*.o \
-		${datadir}/aclocal ${bindir}/*-config"
-FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* /bin/* /sbin/*"
+FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir}/* ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
+            ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
+            ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
+            ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}/*"
+
+FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* \
+                ${base_bindir}/* ${base_sbindir}/*"
-- 
1.7.1

Re: [PATCH] lib_package.bbclass: fix packaging of static libs, inherit binconfig

[Andreas Oberritter]

Ping

On 10/25/2010 04:20 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> * Package ${libdir}/*.a and /lib/*.a into ${PN}-static instead of ${PN}-dev
> * Although it packaged ${bindir}/*-config into FILES_${PN}-dev, it did
>   not include the required mangling applied by binconfig.bbclass.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter <obi@opendreambox.org>
> ---
>  classes/lib_package.bbclass |   17 +++++++++--------
>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/classes/lib_package.bbclass b/classes/lib_package.bbclass
> index 82c9370..7e72dc8 100644
> --- a/classes/lib_package.bbclass
> +++ b/classes/lib_package.bbclass
> @@ -1,10 +1,11 @@
> +inherit binconfig
> +
>  PACKAGES += "${PN}-bin"
>  
> -FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir} ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
> -	    ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
> -	    ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
> -	    ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}"
> -FILES_${PN}-dev = "${includedir} ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBSDEV} ${libdir}/*.la \
> -		${libdir}/*.a ${libdir}/pkgconfig /lib/*.a /lib/*.o \
> -		${datadir}/aclocal ${bindir}/*-config"
> -FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* /bin/* /sbin/*"
> +FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir}/* ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
> +            ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
> +            ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
> +            ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}/*"
> +
> +FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* \
> +                ${base_bindir}/* ${base_sbindir}/*"

Re: [PATCH] lib_package.bbclass: fix packaging of static libs, inherit binconfig

[Tom Rini]

On 11/13/2010 09:28 AM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> Ping
>
> On 10/25/2010 04:20 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>> * Package ${libdir}/*.a and /lib/*.a into ${PN}-static instead of ${PN}-dev

Where is the FILES_${PN}-static line below?

>> * Although it packaged ${bindir}/*-config into FILES_${PN}-dev, it did
>>    not include the required mangling applied by binconfig.bbclass.

Not sure here.  Not all lib packages need binconfig mangling so it's up 
to the recipe to say "I need this", usually at least.

>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter<obi@opendreambox.org>
>> ---
>>   classes/lib_package.bbclass |   17 +++++++++--------
>>   1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/classes/lib_package.bbclass b/classes/lib_package.bbclass
>> index 82c9370..7e72dc8 100644
>> --- a/classes/lib_package.bbclass
>> +++ b/classes/lib_package.bbclass
>> @@ -1,10 +1,11 @@
>> +inherit binconfig
>> +
>>   PACKAGES += "${PN}-bin"
>>
>> -FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir} ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
>> -	    ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
>> -	    ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
>> -	    ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}"
>> -FILES_${PN}-dev = "${includedir} ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBSDEV} ${libdir}/*.la \
>> -		${libdir}/*.a ${libdir}/pkgconfig /lib/*.a /lib/*.o \
>> -		${datadir}/aclocal ${bindir}/*-config"
>> -FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* /bin/* /sbin/*"
>> +FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir}/* ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
>> +            ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
>> +            ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
>> +            ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}/*"
>> +
>> +FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* \
>> +                ${base_bindir}/* ${base_sbindir}/*"
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>


-- 
Tom Rini
Mentor Graphics Corporation

Re: [PATCH] lib_package.bbclass: fix packaging of static libs, inherit binconfig

[Andreas Oberritter]

On 11/13/2010 08:12 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On 11/13/2010 09:28 AM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>> Ping
>>
>> On 10/25/2010 04:20 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>>> * Package ${libdir}/*.a and /lib/*.a into ${PN}-static instead of
>>> ${PN}-dev
> 
> Where is the FILES_${PN}-static line below?

The default value from bitbake.conf is used.

>>> * Although it packaged ${bindir}/*-config into FILES_${PN}-dev, it did
>>>    not include the required mangling applied by binconfig.bbclass.
> 
> Not sure here.  Not all lib packages need binconfig mangling so it's up
> to the recipe to say "I need this", usually at least.

OK, Koen's proposal included "inherit binconfig", too, so I left it in.
I'll send an updated patch without it.

>>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter<obi@opendreambox.org>
>>> ---
>>>   classes/lib_package.bbclass |   17 +++++++++--------
>>>   1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/classes/lib_package.bbclass b/classes/lib_package.bbclass
>>> index 82c9370..7e72dc8 100644
>>> --- a/classes/lib_package.bbclass
>>> +++ b/classes/lib_package.bbclass
>>> @@ -1,10 +1,11 @@
>>> +inherit binconfig
>>> +
>>>   PACKAGES += "${PN}-bin"
>>>
>>> -FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir} ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
>>> -        ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
>>> -        ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
>>> -        ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}"
>>> -FILES_${PN}-dev = "${includedir} ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBSDEV}
>>> ${libdir}/*.la \
>>> -        ${libdir}/*.a ${libdir}/pkgconfig /lib/*.a /lib/*.o \
>>> -        ${datadir}/aclocal ${bindir}/*-config"
>>> -FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* /bin/* /sbin/*"
>>> +FILES_${PN} = "${libexecdir}/* ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} \
>>> +            ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} \
>>> +            ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} \
>>> +            ${datadir}/${PN} ${libdir}/${PN}/*"
>>> +
>>> +FILES_${PN}-bin = "${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* \
>>> +                ${base_bindir}/* ${base_sbindir}/*"
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-devel mailing list
>> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>>
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH] lib_package.bbclass: fix packaging of static libs, inherit binconfig

[Tom Rini]

On 11/14/2010 04:49 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> On 11/13/2010 08:12 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On 11/13/2010 09:28 AM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>>> Ping
>>>
>>> On 10/25/2010 04:20 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>>>> * Package ${libdir}/*.a and /lib/*.a into ${PN}-static instead of
>>>> ${PN}-dev
>>
>> Where is the FILES_${PN}-static line below?
>
> The default value from bitbake.conf is used.

OK, thanks.

>>>> * Although it packaged ${bindir}/*-config into FILES_${PN}-dev, it did
>>>>     not include the required mangling applied by binconfig.bbclass.
>>
>> Not sure here.  Not all lib packages need binconfig mangling so it's up
>> to the recipe to say "I need this", usually at least.
>
> OK, Koen's proposal included "inherit binconfig", too, so I left it in.
> I'll send an updated patch without it.

Just missed the proposal.  Can you link it easily?  Thanks!

-- 
Tom Rini
Mentor Graphics Corporation

Re: [PATCH] lib_package.bbclass: fix packaging of static libs, inherit binconfig

[Andreas Oberritter]

On 11/15/2010 04:07 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On 11/14/2010 04:49 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>> On 11/13/2010 08:12 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On 11/13/2010 09:28 AM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>>>>> * Although it packaged ${bindir}/*-config into FILES_${PN}-dev, it did
>>>>>     not include the required mangling applied by binconfig.bbclass.
>>>
>>> Not sure here.  Not all lib packages need binconfig mangling so it's up
>>> to the recipe to say "I need this", usually at least.
>>
>> OK, Koen's proposal included "inherit binconfig", too, so I left it in.
>> I'll send an updated patch without it.
> 
> Just missed the proposal.  Can you link it easily?  Thanks!

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/38554

Re: [PATCH] lib_package.bbclass: fix packaging of static libs, inherit binconfig

[Tom Rini]

On 11/15/2010 08:46 AM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> On 11/15/2010 04:07 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On 11/14/2010 04:49 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>>> On 11/13/2010 08:12 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>> On 11/13/2010 09:28 AM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>>>>>> * Although it packaged ${bindir}/*-config into FILES_${PN}-dev, it did
>>>>>>      not include the required mangling applied by binconfig.bbclass.
>>>>
>>>> Not sure here.  Not all lib packages need binconfig mangling so it's up
>>>> to the recipe to say "I need this", usually at least.
>>>
>>> OK, Koen's proposal included "inherit binconfig", too, so I left it in.
>>> I'll send an updated patch without it.
>>
>> Just missed the proposal.  Can you link it easily?  Thanks!
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/38554

OK, with that I'm happy with the v1 (that I assume you archived in 
patchwork).

Acked-by: Tom Rini <tom_rini@mentor.com>

-- 
Tom Rini
Mentor Graphics Corporation

Re: [PATCH] lib_package.bbclass: fix packaging of static libs, inherit binconfig

[Andreas Oberritter]

On 11/15/2010 07:11 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On 11/15/2010 08:46 AM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>> On 11/15/2010 04:07 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On 11/14/2010 04:49 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>>>> On 11/13/2010 08:12 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>> On 11/13/2010 09:28 AM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>>>>>>> * Although it packaged ${bindir}/*-config into FILES_${PN}-dev,
>>>>>>> it did
>>>>>>>      not include the required mangling applied by binconfig.bbclass.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure here.  Not all lib packages need binconfig mangling so
>>>>> it's up
>>>>> to the recipe to say "I need this", usually at least.
>>>>
>>>> OK, Koen's proposal included "inherit binconfig", too, so I left it in.
>>>> I'll send an updated patch without it.
>>>
>>> Just missed the proposal.  Can you link it easily?  Thanks!
>>
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/38554
> 
> OK, with that I'm happy with the v1 (that I assume you archived in
> patchwork).
> 
> Acked-by: Tom Rini <tom_rini@mentor.com>
> 

Thanks! Yes, it was archived. Can you please push it?

http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/3428/

Regards,
Andreas

Re: [PATCH] libfribidi-0.10.4: update recipe, fix packaging

[Andreas Oberritter]

Ping (now that the required changes to lib_package.bbclass have been pushed)

Patchwork URL:
http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/3297/

On 10/18/2010 12:15 AM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> * added LICENSE
> * removed configure patch
> * use lib_package and binconfig to package all installed files
> * convert to new style staging
> * oe-stylize
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter <obi@opendreambox.org>
> ---
>  recipes/libfribidi/files/libtool-update.patch |   11 --------
>  recipes/libfribidi/libfribidi_0.10.4.bb       |   32 +++++++-----------------
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>  delete mode 100644 recipes/libfribidi/files/libtool-update.patch
> 
> diff --git a/recipes/libfribidi/files/libtool-update.patch b/recipes/libfribidi/files/libtool-update.patch
> deleted file mode 100644
> index c703100..0000000
> --- a/recipes/libfribidi/files/libtool-update.patch
> +++ /dev/null
> @@ -1,11 +0,0 @@
> ---- fribidi-0.10.4/configure.in~	2002-05-19 11:06:48.000000000 +0100
> -+++ fribidi-0.10.4/configure.in	2004-08-03 17:42:28.000000000 +0100
> -@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@
> - AC_PROG_INSTALL
> - AC_PROG_LN_S
> - AC_PROG_MAKE_SET
> --AC_PROG_RANLIB
> -+#AC_PROG_RANLIB
> - AC_PATH_PROG(SED, sed, $PATH)
> - 
> - 
> diff --git a/recipes/libfribidi/libfribidi_0.10.4.bb b/recipes/libfribidi/libfribidi_0.10.4.bb
> index c46909b..b83c484 100644
> --- a/recipes/libfribidi/libfribidi_0.10.4.bb
> +++ b/recipes/libfribidi/libfribidi_0.10.4.bb
> @@ -1,32 +1,20 @@
>  DESCRIPTION = "Fribidi library for bidirectional text"
>  SECTION = "libs"
>  PRIORITY = "optional"
> +LICENSE = "LGPLv2.1"
> +PR = "r1"
>  
> -inherit autotools pkgconfig
> -
> -PR = "r0"
> +SRC_URI = "${SOURCEFORGE_MIRROR}/fribidi/fribidi-${PV}.tar.bz2"
> +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "0f6e7ecca08e6e108dc06337f5b5cabf"
> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "f3ecdb9d108bd61ec9394df75f5fd68ba886a8da0863ba6258338893aec6c04f"
>  
>  S = "${WORKDIR}/fribidi-${PV}"
>  
> -SRC_URI = "${SOURCEFORGE_MIRROR}/fribidi/fribidi-${PV}.tar.bz2 \
> -           file://libtool-update.patch"
> -
> -#PACKAGES += " ${PN}-bin"
> -FILES_${PN} = "${libdir}/lib*.so.*"
> -#FILES_${PN}-bin = "${libdir}/uu*"
> +inherit autotools lib_package binconfig pkgconfig
>  
>  do_configure_prepend () {
> -# this version of libtool is old - we have to nobble this file to get it to litoolize
> -	rm ltconfig
> -	rm aclocal.m4
> -	rm acinclude.m4
> -}
> -
> -do_stage () {
> -	oe_libinstall -a -so -C .libs libfribidi ${STAGING_LIBDIR}
> -	autotools_stage_includes
> +        # this version of libtool is old - we have to nobble this file to get it to litoolize
> +        rm ltconfig
> +        rm aclocal.m4
> +        rm acinclude.m4
>  }
> -
> -
> -SRC_URI[md5sum] = "0f6e7ecca08e6e108dc06337f5b5cabf"
> -SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "f3ecdb9d108bd61ec9394df75f5fd68ba886a8da0863ba6258338893aec6c04f"