should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
files associated with "ntp", so he could:

  #include <ntp.h>

from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
absolutely empty.

  is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
files? am i overlooking something?

rday

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Khem Raj]

On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>
>
>   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
> files associated with "ntp", so he could:
>
>   #include <ntp.h>
>
> from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
> add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
> in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
> see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
> absolutely empty.
>
>   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
> files? am i overlooking something?

While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
explicitly does
not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be used this way anymore.

>
> rday
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
> View/Reply Online (#93553): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-devel/message/93553
> Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/86553439/1997914
> Group Owner: openembedded-devel+owner@lists.openembedded.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-devel/unsub [raj.khem@gmail.com]
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[rpjday]

Quoting Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>:

> On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day  
> <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
>> files associated with "ntp", so he could:
>>
>>   #include <ntp.h>
>>
>> from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
>> add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
>> in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
>> see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
>> absolutely empty.
>>
>>   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
>> files? am i overlooking something?
>
> While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> explicitly does not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be
> used this way anymore.

   That's what I first suspected, but that seems sort of odd. Does
that mean no one is expected to now develop against ntp? Or what
*does* it mean? I guess checking the Git log is the next step.

rday

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[rpjday]

Quoting Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>:

> On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day  
> <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
>> files associated with "ntp", so he could:
>>
>>   #include <ntp.h>
>>
>> from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
>> add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
>> in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
>> see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
>> absolutely empty.
>>
>>   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
>> files? am i overlooking something?
>
> While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> explicitly does
> not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be used this way anymore.

   i popped over to https://github.com/ntp-project/ntp to see if the README
would clarify anything, and the docs say of the include/ directory:

"Directory containing include header files used by most programs
in the distribution."

   "in the distribution." so does that mean that nothing external
is expected to use them? still unsure as to what to tell other
developers as to whether they are entitled to include any of
those headers, no matter how they do it.

rday

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Sun, 24 Oct 2021, Khem Raj wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >
> >
> >   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
> > files associated with "ntp", so he could:
> >
> >   #include <ntp.h>
> >
> > from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
> > add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
> > in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
> > see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
> > absolutely empty.
> >
> >   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
> > files? am i overlooking something?
>
> While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> explicitly does not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be
> used this way anymore.

  just to tie this back to a question i once asked on (i believe) the
YP mailing list, this wind river build is using ntpsec instead of
regular ntp, but it would appear this would still have the same
problem -- while the ntpsec source contains an "include" directory
with lots of ntp-related header files, if one comes up with an ntpsec
recipe, nothing would be solved if it also does not install those
headers into ntpsec-dev.

  so, simple question: does anyone have a bitbake recipe for current
ntpsec? it's "waf" based, so it might be a bit trickier, but if there
is such a recipe, unless it installs its header files into ntpsec-dev,
then it doesn't really solve the problem, does it?

  thoughts?

rday

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Alex Kiernan]

On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 24 Oct 2021, Khem Raj wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
> > > files associated with "ntp", so he could:
> > >
> > >   #include <ntp.h>
> > >
> > > from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
> > > add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
> > > in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
> > > see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
> > > absolutely empty.
> > >
> > >   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
> > > files? am i overlooking something?
> >
> > While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> > explicitly does not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be
> > used this way anymore.
>
>   just to tie this back to a question i once asked on (i believe) the
> YP mailing list, this wind river build is using ntpsec instead of
> regular ntp, but it would appear this would still have the same
> problem -- while the ntpsec source contains an "include" directory
> with lots of ntp-related header files, if one comes up with an ntpsec
> recipe, nothing would be solved if it also does not install those
> headers into ntpsec-dev.
>
>   so, simple question: does anyone have a bitbake recipe for current
> ntpsec?

I do, it's unfinished as I realised part way through that the python
dependency meant it wasn't going to fit for my use case, but the
basics of the build are there.

-- 
Alex Kiernan

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Mon, 25 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 24 Oct 2021, Khem Raj wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
> > > > files associated with "ntp", so he could:
> > > >
> > > >   #include <ntp.h>
> > > >
> > > > from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
> > > > add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
> > > > in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
> > > > see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
> > > > absolutely empty.
> > > >
> > > >   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
> > > > files? am i overlooking something?
> > >
> > > While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> > > explicitly does not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be
> > > used this way anymore.
> >
> >   just to tie this back to a question i once asked on (i believe) the
> > YP mailing list, this wind river build is using ntpsec instead of
> > regular ntp, but it would appear this would still have the same
> > problem -- while the ntpsec source contains an "include" directory
> > with lots of ntp-related header files, if one comes up with an ntpsec
> > recipe, nothing would be solved if it also does not install those
> > headers into ntpsec-dev.
> >
> >   so, simple question: does anyone have a bitbake recipe for current
> > ntpsec?
>
> I do, it's unfinished as I realised part way through that the python
> dependency meant it wasn't going to fit for my use case, but the
> basics of the build are there.

  so is there a link for this?

rday

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Alex Kiernan]

On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 4:11 PM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 24 Oct 2021, Khem Raj wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
> > > > > files associated with "ntp", so he could:
> > > > >
> > > > >   #include <ntp.h>
> > > > >
> > > > > from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
> > > > > add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
> > > > > in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
> > > > > see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
> > > > > absolutely empty.
> > > > >
> > > > >   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
> > > > > files? am i overlooking something?
> > > >
> > > > While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> > > > explicitly does not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be
> > > > used this way anymore.
> > >
> > >   just to tie this back to a question i once asked on (i believe) the
> > > YP mailing list, this wind river build is using ntpsec instead of
> > > regular ntp, but it would appear this would still have the same
> > > problem -- while the ntpsec source contains an "include" directory
> > > with lots of ntp-related header files, if one comes up with an ntpsec
> > > recipe, nothing would be solved if it also does not install those
> > > headers into ntpsec-dev.
> > >
> > >   so, simple question: does anyone have a bitbake recipe for current
> > > ntpsec?
> >
> > I do, it's unfinished as I realised part way through that the python
> > dependency meant it wasn't going to fit for my use case, but the
> > basics of the build are there.
>
>   so is there a link for this?

Just looking through what needs resolving, I think it's just
initscripts/systemd support


-- 
Alex Kiernan

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Alex Kiernan]

On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 4:11 PM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 24 Oct 2021, Khem Raj wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
> > > > > files associated with "ntp", so he could:
> > > > >
> > > > >   #include <ntp.h>
> > > > >
> > > > > from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
> > > > > add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
> > > > > in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
> > > > > see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
> > > > > absolutely empty.
> > > > >
> > > > >   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
> > > > > files? am i overlooking something?
> > > >
> > > > While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> > > > explicitly does not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be
> > > > used this way anymore.
> > >
> > >   just to tie this back to a question i once asked on (i believe) the
> > > YP mailing list, this wind river build is using ntpsec instead of
> > > regular ntp, but it would appear this would still have the same
> > > problem -- while the ntpsec source contains an "include" directory
> > > with lots of ntp-related header files, if one comes up with an ntpsec
> > > recipe, nothing would be solved if it also does not install those
> > > headers into ntpsec-dev.
> > >
> > >   so, simple question: does anyone have a bitbake recipe for current
> > > ntpsec?
> >
> > I do, it's unfinished as I realised part way through that the python
> > dependency meant it wasn't going to fit for my use case, but the
> > basics of the build are there.
>
>   so is there a link for this?
>

Have a look at this:

https://github.com/akiernan/meta-openembedded/commit/b1464c4b8dcab4a9dfaebbb7116b1c8462a198c4

Seems like it works for me. Will send a patch if it looks good.

-- 
Alex Kiernan

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 26 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 4:11 PM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 25 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 24 Oct 2021, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
> > > > > > files associated with "ntp", so he could:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   #include <ntp.h>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
> > > > > > add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
> > > > > > in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
> > > > > > see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
> > > > > > absolutely empty.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
> > > > > > files? am i overlooking something?
> > > > >
> > > > > While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> > > > > explicitly does not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be
> > > > > used this way anymore.
> > > >
> > > >   just to tie this back to a question i once asked on (i believe) the
> > > > YP mailing list, this wind river build is using ntpsec instead of
> > > > regular ntp, but it would appear this would still have the same
> > > > problem -- while the ntpsec source contains an "include" directory
> > > > with lots of ntp-related header files, if one comes up with an ntpsec
> > > > recipe, nothing would be solved if it also does not install those
> > > > headers into ntpsec-dev.
> > > >
> > > >   so, simple question: does anyone have a bitbake recipe for current
> > > > ntpsec?
> > >
> > > I do, it's unfinished as I realised part way through that the python
> > > dependency meant it wasn't going to fit for my use case, but the
> > > basics of the build are there.
> >
> >   so is there a link for this?
> >
>
> Have a look at this:
>
> https://github.com/akiernan/meta-openembedded/commit/b1464c4b8dcab4a9dfaebbb7116b1c8462a198c4
>
> Seems like it works for me. Will send a patch if it looks good.

  setting up to test build right now: poky/aarch64/core-image-base.
will let you know. thank you kindly.

rday

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 26 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 4:11 PM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 25 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 24 Oct 2021, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
> > > > > > files associated with "ntp", so he could:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   #include <ntp.h>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
> > > > > > add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
> > > > > > in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
> > > > > > see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
> > > > > > absolutely empty.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
> > > > > > files? am i overlooking something?
> > > > >
> > > > > While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> > > > > explicitly does not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be
> > > > > used this way anymore.
> > > >
> > > >   just to tie this back to a question i once asked on (i believe) the
> > > > YP mailing list, this wind river build is using ntpsec instead of
> > > > regular ntp, but it would appear this would still have the same
> > > > problem -- while the ntpsec source contains an "include" directory
> > > > with lots of ntp-related header files, if one comes up with an ntpsec
> > > > recipe, nothing would be solved if it also does not install those
> > > > headers into ntpsec-dev.
> > > >
> > > >   so, simple question: does anyone have a bitbake recipe for current
> > > > ntpsec?
> > >
> > > I do, it's unfinished as I realised part way through that the python
> > > dependency meant it wasn't going to fit for my use case, but the
> > > basics of the build are there.
> >
> >   so is there a link for this?
> >
>
> Have a look at this:
>
> https://github.com/akiernan/meta-openembedded/commit/b1464c4b8dcab4a9dfaebbb7116b1c8462a198c4
>
> Seems like it works for me. Will send a patch if it looks good.

  well, it builds for my poky/aarch64/core-image-base build, so all
that's let is to decide how to populate ntpsec-dev with those header
files (simple), and why they're not part of nptsec-dev in the first
place.

rday

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Alex Kiernan]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 4:55 PM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 4:11 PM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 25 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 24 Oct 2021, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
> > > > > > > files associated with "ntp", so he could:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   #include <ntp.h>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
> > > > > > > add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
> > > > > > > in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
> > > > > > > see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
> > > > > > > absolutely empty.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
> > > > > > > files? am i overlooking something?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> > > > > > explicitly does not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be
> > > > > > used this way anymore.
> > > > >
> > > > >   just to tie this back to a question i once asked on (i believe) the
> > > > > YP mailing list, this wind river build is using ntpsec instead of
> > > > > regular ntp, but it would appear this would still have the same
> > > > > problem -- while the ntpsec source contains an "include" directory
> > > > > with lots of ntp-related header files, if one comes up with an ntpsec
> > > > > recipe, nothing would be solved if it also does not install those
> > > > > headers into ntpsec-dev.
> > > > >
> > > > >   so, simple question: does anyone have a bitbake recipe for current
> > > > > ntpsec?
> > > >
> > > > I do, it's unfinished as I realised part way through that the python
> > > > dependency meant it wasn't going to fit for my use case, but the
> > > > basics of the build are there.
> > >
> > >   so is there a link for this?
> > >
> >
> > Have a look at this:
> >
> > https://github.com/akiernan/meta-openembedded/commit/b1464c4b8dcab4a9dfaebbb7116b1c8462a198c4
> >
> > Seems like it works for me. Will send a patch if it looks good.
>
>   well, it builds for my poky/aarch64/core-image-base build, so all
> that's let is to decide how to populate ntpsec-dev with those header
> files (simple), and why they're not part of nptsec-dev in the first
> place.
>

I'm just scanning through the code and I don't obviously see anything
which is a public interface (other than the python one)? There's
clearly bits you could pick out, but having that in a default package
feels wrong to me - there's no -dev package in Ubuntu that I can spot
either.

-- 
Alex Kiernan

Re: [oe] should "ntp-dev" package have header files in it, or not?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Wed, 27 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 4:55 PM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 26 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 4:11 PM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 25 Oct 2021, Alex Kiernan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, 24 Oct 2021, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 5:51 AM Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >   colleague recently asked me how to get access to one or more header
> > > > > > > > files associated with "ntp", so he could:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >   #include <ntp.h>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > from some other code. casually, i suggested the standard way was to
> > > > > > > > add ntp to his recipe's DEPENDS, but that didn't do it, so i built ntp
> > > > > > > > in my own aarch64 project, then took a look under packages-split to
> > > > > > > > see what got packaged in ntp-dev, and was puzzled to see it was
> > > > > > > > absolutely empty.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >   is this deliberate? are other recipes not entitled to ntp's header
> > > > > > > > files? am i overlooking something?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > While the header seems to be meant for public consumption, the build
> > > > > > > explicitly does not export it, so perhaps thats not expected to be
> > > > > > > used this way anymore.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   just to tie this back to a question i once asked on (i believe) the
> > > > > > YP mailing list, this wind river build is using ntpsec instead of
> > > > > > regular ntp, but it would appear this would still have the same
> > > > > > problem -- while the ntpsec source contains an "include" directory
> > > > > > with lots of ntp-related header files, if one comes up with an ntpsec
> > > > > > recipe, nothing would be solved if it also does not install those
> > > > > > headers into ntpsec-dev.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   so, simple question: does anyone have a bitbake recipe for current
> > > > > > ntpsec?
> > > > >
> > > > > I do, it's unfinished as I realised part way through that the python
> > > > > dependency meant it wasn't going to fit for my use case, but the
> > > > > basics of the build are there.
> > > >
> > > >   so is there a link for this?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Have a look at this:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/akiernan/meta-openembedded/commit/b1464c4b8dcab4a9dfaebbb7116b1c8462a198c4
> > >
> > > Seems like it works for me. Will send a patch if it looks good.
> >
> >   well, it builds for my poky/aarch64/core-image-base build, so all
> > that's let is to decide how to populate ntpsec-dev with those header
> > files (simple), and why they're not part of nptsec-dev in the first
> > place.
> >
>
> I'm just scanning through the code and I don't obviously see
> anything which is a public interface (other than the python one)?
> There's clearly bits you could pick out, but having that in a
> default package feels wrong to me - there's no -dev package in
> Ubuntu that I can spot either.

  i know, and i just had clarified for me why they're trying to do it
this way -- they don't want to support the python interface, so they
have to do this hack. i'm not sure i want to go along with that idea.

rday