[Review] Remove /xorg-lib/pixman_* in favor of /libpixman/libpixman_*

[Review] Remove /xorg-lib/pixman_* in favor of /libpixman/libpixman_*

[Leon Woestenberg]

Hello,

(lib)pixman is present at two locations:

/libpixman/libpixman_*
/xorg-lib/pixman_*

The latter has a false/redundant DEPENDS = "util-macros
xorg-headers-native" as it includes xorg-lib/xorg-lib-common.inc.

That these are redundant can be tested with the latest 0.9.6 recipes,
present in both directories, which have been *identical* and present
since 2007-11-10.

* I propose to remove the xorg-lib/ ones, as pixman is independent of
X. That's also the way I use it.

* I would like to hear if anyone using X and /libpixman/libpixman
0.9.6 found any problems so far, as I don't use X on my targets (yet).


Regards,
-- 
Leon

Re: [Review] Remove /xorg-lib/pixman_* in favor of /libpixman/libpixman_*

[Koen Kooi]

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

Leon Woestenberg schreef:
| Hello,
|
| (lib)pixman is present at two locations:
|
| /libpixman/libpixman_*
| /xorg-lib/pixman_*
|
| The latter has a false/redundant DEPENDS = "util-macros
| xorg-headers-native" as it includes xorg-lib/xorg-lib-common.inc.
|
| That these are redundant can be tested with the latest 0.9.6 recipes,
| present in both directories, which have been *identical* and present
| since 2007-11-10.
|
| * I propose to remove the xorg-lib/ ones, as pixman is independent of
| X. That's also the way I use it.
|
| * I would like to hear if anyone using X and /libpixman/libpixman
| 0.9.6 found any problems so far, as I don't use X on my targets (yet).

How about dropping the xorg-lib one and renaming libpixman to pixman?

regards,

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

iD8DBQFH8dnlMkyGM64RGpERAigbAJ4541CA5X/zMvP1WOzYWJWIJaYzcACeKwgD
59VCHHpCF2mR/2Rrxs0QMGs=
=6hH/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Review] Remove /xorg-lib/pixman_* in favor of /libpixman/libpixman_*

[Leon Woestenberg]

Hello Koen,

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Koen Kooi
<koen@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> wrote:
>  How about dropping the xorg-lib one and renaming libpixman to pixman?
>
+1 on both. I'll commit tomorrow if nobody beat me to it.

Regards,
-- 
Leon

Re: [Review] Remove /xorg-lib/pixman_* in favor of /libpixman/libpixman_*

[pHilipp Zabel]

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Leon Woestenberg
<leon.woestenberg@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Koen,
>
>
>  On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Koen Kooi
>  <koen@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> wrote:
>  >  How about dropping the xorg-lib one and renaming libpixman to pixman?
>  >
>  +1 on both. I'll commit tomorrow if nobody beat me to it.

Sorry I'm late, but I kind of maybe disagree a bit. I might be
confused about the cairo/xorg source locations, but as I understand
it, xorg.freedesktop.org/releases/individual/lib is the canonical
upstream version. So why not put it in xorg-lib and make use of
xorg-lib-common.inc?

+1 on the libpixman -> pixman part though.

regards
Philipp

Re: [Review] Remove /xorg-lib/pixman_* in favor of /libpixman/libpixman_*

[Leon Woestenberg]

Hello Philipp,

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:45 PM, pHilipp Zabel <philipp.zabel@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Leon Woestenberg
>  <leon.woestenberg@gmail.com> wrote:
>  > Hello Koen,
>  >  On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Koen Kooi
>  >  <koen@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> wrote:
>  >  >  How about dropping the xorg-lib one and renaming libpixman to pixman?
>  >  >
>  >  +1 on both. I'll commit tomorrow if nobody beat me to it.
>
>  Sorry I'm late, but I kind of maybe disagree a bit. I might be
>  confused about the cairo/xorg source locations, but as I understand
>  it, xorg.freedesktop.org/releases/individual/lib is the canonical
>  upstream version. So why not put it in xorg-lib and make use of
>  xorg-lib-common.inc?
>
Putting it in xorg-lib is not the big issue. However including
xorg-lib-common.inc is a big issue.

For a system that only uses pixman, and not anything else, it starts
building a complete X server etc. etc. because the xorg include adds
those dependencies.

These dependencies are NOT in pixman. Maybe in upper libraries, but
even then it depends on their configuration etc. etc.

I'ld like to keep the "embedded" in OpenEmbedded, also for small
embedded Linux systems.

>  +1 on the libpixman -> pixman part though.
>
OK, that sounds easy enough.

What would be the good reason to keep pixman in the xorg-lib
directory? Why do we have this directory, we don't have a gnome/
directory where gtk+ lives, I do not really see the benefit?

Regards,
-- 
Leon

Re: [Review] Remove /xorg-lib/pixman_* in favor of /libpixman/libpixman_*

[pHilipp Zabel]

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Leon Woestenberg
<leon.woestenberg@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Philipp,
>
>
>
>  On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:45 PM, pHilipp Zabel <philipp.zabel@gmail.com> wrote:
>  > On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Leon Woestenberg
>  >  <leon.woestenberg@gmail.com> wrote:
>  >  > Hello Koen,
>  >  >  On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Koen Kooi
>  >  >  <koen@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> wrote:
>  >  >  >  How about dropping the xorg-lib one and renaming libpixman to pixman?
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  +1 on both. I'll commit tomorrow if nobody beat me to it.
>  >
>  >  Sorry I'm late, but I kind of maybe disagree a bit. I might be
>  >  confused about the cairo/xorg source locations, but as I understand
>  >  it, xorg.freedesktop.org/releases/individual/lib is the canonical
>  >  upstream version. So why not put it in xorg-lib and make use of
>  >  xorg-lib-common.inc?
>  >
>  Putting it in xorg-lib is not the big issue. However including
>  xorg-lib-common.inc is a big issue.
>
>  For a system that only uses pixman, and not anything else, it starts
>  building a complete X server etc. etc. because the xorg include adds
>  those dependencies.

Argh, I didn't see that.
I guess we could start including xorg-lib-common.inc and overwriting
DEPENDS = "" in pixman.bb, but that's a bit hackish...
As pixman doesn't gain too much from xorg-lib-common.inc, I'm just as
fine with putting it outside xorg-lib.

>  These dependencies are NOT in pixman. Maybe in upper libraries, but
>  even then it depends on their configuration etc. etc.
>
>  I'ld like to keep the "embedded" in OpenEmbedded, also for small
>  embedded Linux systems.

Sure thing. Especially as this is not even an optional dependency, but
just plain wrong :)

>  What would be the good reason to keep pixman in the xorg-lib
>  directory? Why do we have this directory, we don't have a gnome/
>  directory where gtk+ lives, I do not really see the benefit?

The main reason was to group the common fields of many very similar
recipes into -common.inc files so they wouldn't have to be duplicated
all the time. This also decreased the number of entries in the
packages dir quite a bit. And I figured it's just easier to check for
updates / new xorg packages by running some scripts against the xorg-*
dirs and $XORG_MIRROR/.../index.html than to maintain a list of xorg
packages or even watch them manually.
The only reason left I see for putting pixman in xorg-lib is a)
consistency and b) I have to add an exception for pixman to my shell
script so it doesn't show up as missing :)

regards
Philipp