[Buildroot] [PATCH v6] kodi: allow enablement of libamcodec as codec if selected

[Buildroot] [PATCH v6] kodi: allow enablement of libamcodec as codec if selected

[Dagg Stompler]

allow usage of amcodec if kodi is built and libamcodec is selected

Signed-off-by: Dagg Stompler <daggs@gmx.com>
---

v5 -> v6:
 - simplify patch so it will fit kodi 17 too (Thomas Petazzoni)
 - allow multiple codecs enabled.

v4 -> v5:
 - add description and signed off to the kodi patch. (Thomas Petazzoni).

v3 -> v4:
 - properly define the includes for amcodec when cross compiling.

v2 -> v3:
 - fix change after kodi.mk was changed.

v1 -> v2:
 - fixed mail title and comment

 package/kodi/kodi.mk | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/package/kodi/kodi.mk b/package/kodi/kodi.mk
index e0361da..4682d3f 100644
--- a/package/kodi/kodi.mk
+++ b/package/kodi/kodi.mk
@@ -113,6 +113,12 @@ KODI_DEPENDENCIES += imx-vpuwrap
 KODI_CONF_OPTS += --enable-codec=imxvpu
 endif
 
+ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_LIBAMCODEC),y)
+KODI_DEPENDENCIES += libamcodec
+KODI_CONF_OPTS += --enable-codec=amcodec
+KODI_CONF_ENV += INCLUDES="-I$(STAGING_DIR)/usr/include/amcodec"
+endif
+
 ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_LIBCAP),y)
 KODI_CONF_OPTS += --enable-libcap
 KODI_DEPENDENCIES += libcap
-- 
2.10.2

[Buildroot] [PATCH v6] kodi: allow enablement of libamcodec as codec if selected

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Sat,  5 Nov 2016 17:40:42 +0200, Dagg Stompler wrote:

> diff --git a/package/kodi/kodi.mk b/package/kodi/kodi.mk
> index e0361da..4682d3f 100644
> --- a/package/kodi/kodi.mk
> +++ b/package/kodi/kodi.mk
> @@ -113,6 +113,12 @@ KODI_DEPENDENCIES += imx-vpuwrap
>  KODI_CONF_OPTS += --enable-codec=imxvpu
>  endif
>  
> +ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_LIBAMCODEC),y)
> +KODI_DEPENDENCIES += libamcodec
> +KODI_CONF_OPTS += --enable-codec=amcodec
> +KODI_CONF_ENV += INCLUDES="-I$(STAGING_DIR)/usr/include/amcodec"
> +endif

This is not good for two reasons:

 1. Because the Kodi Makefile for amcodec currently does
    -I$(prefix)/include, which will be detected by our paranoid wrapper
    as a bogus path because -I/usr/include is incorrect when
    cross-compiling.

 2. Because there are now two conditions that pass a INCLUDES= value in
    KODI_CONF_ENV, overwriting each other. Even if in practice they are
    mutually exclusive (you won't build amcodec support and RPi support
    in the same build), it is still dangerous.

Both of those problems were fixed by my proposal in your reply to your
PATCHv5, but for some reason you decided to not follow this proposal.

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH v6] kodi: allow enablement of libamcodec as codec if selected

[daggs]

Greetings,

> Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 at 6:12 PM
> From: "Thomas Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
> To: "Dagg Stompler" <daggs@gmx.com>
> Cc: buildroot at buildroot.org
> Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v6] kodi: allow enablement of libamcodec as codec if selected
>
> Hello,
> 
> On Sat,  5 Nov 2016 17:40:42 +0200, Dagg Stompler wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/package/kodi/kodi.mk b/package/kodi/kodi.mk
> > index e0361da..4682d3f 100644
> > --- a/package/kodi/kodi.mk
> > +++ b/package/kodi/kodi.mk
> > @@ -113,6 +113,12 @@ KODI_DEPENDENCIES += imx-vpuwrap
> >  KODI_CONF_OPTS += --enable-codec=imxvpu
> >  endif
> >  
> > +ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_LIBAMCODEC),y)
> > +KODI_DEPENDENCIES += libamcodec
> > +KODI_CONF_OPTS += --enable-codec=amcodec
> > +KODI_CONF_ENV += INCLUDES="-I$(STAGING_DIR)/usr/include/amcodec"
> > +endif
> 
> This is not good for two reasons:
> 
>  1. Because the Kodi Makefile for amcodec currently does
>     -I$(prefix)/include, which will be detected by our paranoid wrapper
>     as a bogus path because -I/usr/include is incorrect when
>     cross-compiling.
> 
>  2. Because there are now two conditions that pass a INCLUDES= value in
>     KODI_CONF_ENV, overwriting each other. Even if in practice they are
>     mutually exclusive (you won't build amcodec support and RPi support
>     in the same build), it is still dangerous.
> 
> Both of those problems were fixed by my proposal in your reply to your
> PATCHv5, but for some reason you decided to not follow this proposal.
I've misread your comments, will reevaluate.


> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Thomas
> -- 
> Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> http://free-electrons.com
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
>