From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.pbcl.net ([88.198.119.4] helo=hetzner.pbcl.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QUy1s-0006b6-HT for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:29:24 +0200 Received: from cambridge.roku.com ([81.142.160.137] helo=[172.30.1.145]) by hetzner.pbcl.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QUxyg-0000EL-8u for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:26:06 +0200 From: Phil Blundell To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer In-Reply-To: <79966738c56b3d8dbcb262642447f9efe7af930a.1307686610.git.sgw@linux.intel.com> References: <79966738c56b3d8dbcb262642447f9efe7af930a.1307686610.git.sgw@linux.intel.com> Organization: Phil Blundell Consulting Ltd Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 10:25:09 +0100 Message-ID: <1307697909.2529.4983.camel@phil-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Subject: Re: [CONSOLIDATED PULL 4/4] multiple recipes converted to -staticdev packages X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 09:29:24 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 23:26 -0700, Saul Wold wrote: > +DEPENDS_libpci-staticdev = "libpci-dev (= ${EXTENDPKGV})" This can't be right. I guess that would be a good thing for recipe-sanity to test for in fact. > +FILES_eglibc-dev_append += "${bindir}/rpcgen ${base_libdir}/*.o ${datadir}/aclocal" > +FILES_eglibc-staticdev_append += "${libdir}/*.a ${base_libdir}/*.a" You need to make sure that libc_nonshared.a goes into -dev rather than -staticdev somehow. I didn't immediately spot any mechanism which would do this, though I haven't tested the package to find out what happens. > +FILES_uclibc-staticdev_append = "\ > + ${libdir}/*_nonshared.a \ > + ${libdir}/lib*.a \ In similar vein, this doesn't look right. > diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux.inc b/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux.inc > index b77266a..ed4bcdb 100644 > --- a/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux.inc > +++ b/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux.inc > @@ -13,6 +13,8 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://README.licensing;md5=9c920d811858a74b67a36ba23cbaa95f > file://licenses/COPYING.UCB;md5=263860f8968d8bafa5392cab74285262 \ > file://getopt/COPYING;md5=8ca43cbc842c2336e835926c2166c28b" > > +INC_PR = "r0" > + > diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux_2.19.1.bb b/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux_2.19.1.bb > index 132f28b..3c5747c 100644 > --- a/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux_2.19.1.bb > +++ b/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux_2.19.1.bb > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > MAJOR_VERSION = "2.19" > -PR = "r1" > +PR = "${INC_PR}.0" This looks like it will cause PR to go backwards. > require util-linux.inc > > # note that `lscpu' is under GPLv3+ > diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc b/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc > index 08c14b2..82d9511 100644 > --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc > +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils.inc > @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ FILES_${PN} = " \ > > FILES_${PN}-dev = " \ > ${includedir} \ > - ${libdir}/*.a \ > ${libdir}/*.la \ > ${libdir}/libbfd.so \ > ${libdir}/libopcodes.so" This one is a bit odd: it seems to just be dropping the .a files altogether without introducing a -staticdev package for them. > +DEPENDS_libg2c-staticdev = "libg2c-dev (= ${EXTENDPKGV})" > +DEPENDS_libstdc++-staticdev = "libstdc++-dev (= ${EXTENDPKGV})" > +DEPENDS_libssp-staticdev = "libssp-dev (= ${EXTENDPKGV})" > +DEPENDS_libfortran-staticdev = "libfortran-dev (= ${EXTENDPKGV})" > +DEPENDS_libmudflap-staticdev = "libmudflap-dev (= ${EXTENDPKGV})" >+DEPENDS_libopkg${PKGSUFFIX}-staticdev = "libopkg${PKGSUFFIX}-dev (= ${EXTENDPKGV})" Those all look wrong. > --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/liba52/liba52_0.7.4.bb > +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/liba52/liba52_0.7.4.bb > @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=0636e73ff0215e8d672dc4c32c317bb3 \ > file://include/a52.h;beginline=1;endline=12;md5=81152ceb3562bf20a60d1b6018175dd1" > SECTION = "libs" > PRIORITY = "optional" > -PR = "r2" > +PR = "r3" > > inherit autotools > > @@ -21,7 +21,8 @@ EXTRA_OECONF = " --enable-shared " > PACKAGES =+ "a52dec a52dec-dbg a52dec-doc" > > FILES_${PN} = " ${libdir}/liba52.so.0 ${libdir}/liba52.so.0.0.0 " > -FILES_${PN}-dev = " ${includedir}/a52dec/*.h ${libdir}/liba52.so ${libdir}/liba52.la ${libdir}/liba52.a " > +#FILES_${PN}-dev = " ${includedir}/a52dec/*.h ${libdir}/liba52.so ${libdir}/liba52.la " >+#FILES_${PN}-staticdev = " ${libdir}/liba52.a " This is a bit weird. What's going on here? > +DEPENDS_lib${PN}-staticdev = "lib${PN}-dev (= ${EXTENDPKGV})" As above. > +DEPENDS_lib${PN}-staticdev = "lib${PN}-dev (= ${EXTENDPKGV})" Ditto. All in all I think this patch needs a bit more work. It was quite a big diff so I only skimmed it rather than reviewing it thoroughly but I don't think it is quite ready to go in yet. Also, can't a lot of this be done in bitbake.conf without quite so much recipe patching? p.