From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QbsSz-0000Ct-Ow for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:57:58 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5TAsHLM003239 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:54:17 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 03040-03 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:54:13 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5TAsCLb003232 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:54:12 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer In-Reply-To: <1309341325.15156.232.camel@phil-desktop> References: <044DC375-E0BA-44D9-A063-9BB8E11F7742@dominion.thruhere.net> <1309341325.15156.232.camel@phil-desktop> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:53:55 +0100 Message-ID: <1309344835.20015.355.camel@rex> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: Gstreamer packaging 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: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:57:58 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 10:55 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 11:33 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > > So the new systems does the following: > > > > * split out each plugin as gst-plugin- > > * split out each lib as lib > > > > So both plugins and libraries have a stable package name (barring > plugin renames, e.g. flvdemux -> flv). Package feeds and upgrades > finally work as expected > > Agreed, I think this is about the only reasonable thing to do. The way > that the gstreamer folks bundle up their plugins for distribution, and > particularly the semi-arbitrary split between -base, -good and -bad, is > not especially helpful for consumers of those packages. > > In the past I have been strongly tempted to just stick all the plugins > (with the possible exception of -ugly, which might require a bit of > ENTERPRISE_DISTRO care) into a single recipe so that at least you always > know which recipe needs building to get a given plugin. That would > obviously lead to more build time but I think it is probably a good > tradeoff in this situation. In an ideal world it would be nice for all > the plugins to be packaged independently a la Xorg, but I have no idea > whether the gstreamer folks would be receptive to that idea. Let me quickly recap the problem. Its perfectly reasonable for a recipe to want to depend on "gst-plugin-". The trouble is that bitbake is left pretty much totally clueless when something says it would like to have "gst-plugin-" and multiple things provide it. Obviously you can make the recipe depend on good+bad+ugly but its less than ideal for build time reasons (esp. when considering dependencies) but also the reason that good/bad/ugly exist in the first place which is licensing. If the recipe always has to depend on good+bad+ugly, it becomes rather tricky to disable ugly and work out whether the resulting configuration can build. Companies interested in license compliance do have a strong need to be able to do this. Its for the latter reason that OE-Core has kept ${PN} in the plugin names at present since deterministic builds are kind of nice. > > OE .dev has a slightly different approach where you manually go > > through deploy and see what got generated by who and plug that into > > PROVIDES. I'm not a big fan of that, but it eliminates those scary > > messages. > > I guess that does also work, but I didn't like the patch when it first > went into .dev and I am still not very fond of it. It would at least ensure deterministic builds but I share your lack of fondness. A recipe per plugin would certainly start to look attractive and it might be worth talking to the gstreamer people... Cheers, Richard