Re: [PATCH 40/43] waffle: supprt build waffle without x11

[akuster808 <akuster808@gmail.com>]

On 5/4/19 10:40 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sat, May 04, 2019 at 10:05:11AM -0700, akuster808 wrote:
>>
>> On 5/4/19 9:09 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>>> On Sat, May 04, 2019 at 08:27:16AM -0700, Armin Kuster wrote:
>>>> From: Changqing Li <changqing.li@windriver.com>
>>>>
>>>> respect DISTRO_FEATURES to make waffle support different platform,
>>>> gbm platform is supported by default.
>>>>
>>>> [YOCTO #6077]
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Changqing Li <changqing.li@windriver.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Armin Kuster <akuster808@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  meta/recipes-graphics/waffle/waffle_1.5.2.bb | 7 +++----
>>>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-graphics/waffle/waffle_1.5.2.bb b/meta/recipes-graphics/waffle/waffle_1.5.2.bb
>>>> index 43c3edc..31572f2 100644
>>>> --- a/meta/recipes-graphics/waffle/waffle_1.5.2.bb
>>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-graphics/waffle/waffle_1.5.2.bb
>>>> @@ -15,10 +15,9 @@ inherit cmake distro_features_check lib_package
>>>>  
>>>>  # This should be overridden per-machine to reflect the capabilities of the GL
>>>>  # stack.
>>>> -PACKAGECONFIG ??= "glx"
>>>> -
>>>> -# libx11 requires x11 in DISTRO_FEATURES.
>>>> -REQUIRED_DISTRO_FEATURES = "${@bb.utils.contains('PACKAGECONFIG', 'glx', 'x11', '', d)}"
>>>> +PACKAGECONFIG ??= "${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'x11', 'glx x11-egl', '', d)} \
>>>> +                   ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'wayland', 'wayland', '', d)} \
>>>> +                   gbm"
>>>> ...
>>> Changing the default PACKAGECONFIG does not look appropriate for
>>> a stable branch.
>> Go look at the bug for more details.
> It raises the additional question why the new feature of building piglit
> without x11 is considered appropriate for a stable branch.
>
> You said before that adding new recipes to stable branches is not 
> appropriate. Changing the behaviour of existing recipes is a lot worse 
> than that, since it changes what gets built in existing distibutions 
> using the stable branch.
>
> And a 5 year old bug asking for an enhancement of an existing recipe
> does not sound like an appropriate justification for changing the
> default PACKAGECONFIG of a recipe in a stable branch to me.

Seems like a good argument.
will drop patch

thanks

- armin
>
>> - armin
> cu
> Adrian
>