Re: [meta-oe][PATCHv2] libsoc: new recipe

[Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>]

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

Op 13-09-13 16:53, Paul Eggleton schreef:
> On Friday 13 September 2013 15:23:36 Jack Mitchell wrote:
>> On 13/09/13 15:18, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>> Op 13-09-13 15:22, Jack Mitchell schreef:
>>>> From: Jack Mitchell <jack@embed.me.uk>
>>>> 
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jack Mitchell <jack@embed.me.uk> ---
>>>> 
>>>> Change from v1: added signed-off-by
>>>> 
>>>> meta-oe/recipes-support/libsoc/libsoc_0.3.bb | 18
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) create mode
>>>> 100644 meta-oe/recipes-support/libsoc/libsoc_0.3.bb
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-support/libsoc/libsoc_0.3.bb 
>>>> b/meta-oe/recipes-support/libsoc/libsoc_0.3.bb new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..e91e152 --- /dev/null +++ 
>>>> b/meta-oe/recipes-support/libsoc/libsoc_0.3.bb @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
>>>> +SUMMARY = "libsoc is a C library for interfacing with common SoC
>>>> peripherals through generic kernel interfaces" +HOMEPAGE = 
>>>> "https://github.com/jackmitch/libsoc" + +LICENSE = "LGPLv2.1" 
>>>> +LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = 
>>>> "file://COPYING;md5=e0bfebea12a718922225ba987b2126a5" + +inherit 
>>>> autotools + +DEPENDS = "libgcc"
>>> 
>>> Isn't that automatically implied with gcc-cross?
>> 
>> I wasn't sure, so I thought I would stick it in and see if anyone
>> piped up, I'll remove it in v3.
>> 
>> Also on that note I noticed that Apache2 also DEPENDS on libgcc, is
>> that also wrong?
> 
> I don't know anything about this particular recipe, but IIRC, apache
> complains if libgcc is not installed at runtime, and at least when I
> added that to the recipe it was not being installed otherwise.

But that's RDEPENDS, no?

regards,

Koen

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iD8DBQFSMyevMkyGM64RGpERAnlAAJ0aAfuIr7y4hfWWnFYZxDpO1PkEFQCfZ0Us
8RLlJNtHvW+K3PCXSPAsTFo=
=Wfci
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----