From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2017 15:03:17 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v8 07/12] e2fsprogs: refactor to fix conflicts with busybox and util-linux In-Reply-To: <20170422115955.22718-8-arnout@mind.be> References: <20170422115955.22718-1-arnout@mind.be> <20170422115955.22718-8-arnout@mind.be> Message-ID: <20170422150317.576c0b54@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 13:59:50 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) wrote: > +# If both e2fsprogs and busybox are selected, make certain e2fsprogs > +# wins the fight over who gets to have their utils actually installed > +ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_BUSYBOX),y) > +E2FSPROGS_DEPENDENCIES += busybox > +endif We recently had a ncurses/busybox discussion, in which to solve a circular dependency problem we removed such a dependency on Busybox. As part of this discussion, we started thinking about whether we should stop using the solution of depending on busybox to allow a package to override Busybox applets, and instead make sure the corresponding applets in Busybox are disabled when another package will install the full featured version of the program. Should we generalize this idea, and apply it to e2fsprogs as well? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com