From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Baruch Siach Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 10:45:17 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] hidapi: new package In-Reply-To: <20151118092210.30ff22d2@free-electrons.com> References: <1447692852-21669-1-git-send-email-Vincent.Riera@imgtec.com> <20151116180724.GK9908@tarshish> <564AFD4E.2000301@imgtec.com> <20151118045051.GO9908@tarshish> <20151118092210.30ff22d2@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20151118084517.GT9908@tarshish> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi Thomas, On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 09:22:10AM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 06:50:51 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote: > > > Of course we could use ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_LIBGUDEV),y) here, but, for > > > consistency with Config.in, I use ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_SYSTEMD),y) > > > instead. See for instance the udisks package. > > > > I think this is wrong. First, consistency with Config.in calls for using > > BR2_PACKAGE_LIBGUDEV like we do with all other selects. But more > > importantly, IMO, we only use the _DEPENDENCIES variable to set > > the build order which is conceptually independent of the underlying > > reason we need this dependency, systemd in this case. I think that > > all the other packages that Thomas mentioned should also test for > > BR2_PACKAGE_LIBGUDEV when setting _DEPENDENCIES. > > I am not as clear-cut as you are on what is the correct thing to do > here, but your reasoning seems reasonable to me. So we need to align > the existing packages to do this, and also to use BR2_INIT_SYSTEMD in > Config.in (udisks uses BR2_PACKAGE_SYSTEMD). Will you send some patches > or should I do so? I'll send the patches later. Would you like one patch per package, or a single patch based on next? baruch -- http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -