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 1QV2Zc-0006JP-Mj for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 16:20:32 +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 1QV2WQ-0000Im-71 for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 16:17:14 +0200 From: Phil Blundell To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer In-Reply-To: <1307667467-467-2-git-send-email-raj.khem@gmail.com> References: <1307667467-467-1-git-send-email-raj.khem@gmail.com> <1307667467-467-2-git-send-email-raj.khem@gmail.com> Organization: Phil Blundell Consulting Ltd Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 15:17:13 +0100 Message-ID: <1307715433.25285.18.camel@phil-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sysklogd.inc: Check for package-management in IMAGE_FEATURES 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 14:20:32 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 17:57 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > -RDEPENDS_${PN}_append = " ${@base_conditional("ONLINE_PACKAGE_MANAGEMENT", "none", "", "update-rc.d", d)}" > +RDEPENDS_${PN}_append = " ${@oe.utils.contains("IMAGE_FEATURES", "package-management", "update-rc.d", "", d)}" This sort of thing shouldn't be necessary in oe-core. See previous discussions between me and Richard as to why IMAGE_FEATURES is not the right thing, and code in package_ipk.bbclass which ought to be taking care of it. If you're using a different package manager then it should be fairly straightforward to adapt that logic to suit. You're right though the the reference to O_P_M is clearly wrong and should be removed. I'm not quite sure how that got in there in the first place; must have been some oversight during patch review I guess. p.