From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 00/25] Static Library Updated
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 11:07:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1310551676.20015.1094.camel@rex> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1310541680.git.sgw@linux.intel.com>
Hi Saul,
I know we touched on this when we've talked but I'm not sure you saw
what I was getting and and its probably better to ask this question on
the list anyhow.
Fundamentally, is it useful to have a ton of xxx-staticdev packages?
In a few key cases split -dev packages are useful (qt, eds, gcc spring
to mind). In general however they probably aren't and often no thought
has been given into splitting them out. One good indicator is whether
the headers are split up. If not, then there are likely issues.
If split -dev packages aren't useful, its likely that split staticdev
packages are also less useful. I'm really wondering if there ever is a
use case where you'd need the individual staticdev packages or you'd
have the disk space to manage installing the full thing?
Taking wireless-tools as an example, its going to a lot of effort to
change the default PACKAGES and create a libiw-dev package. It drops the
wireless-tools-dev package in the original, your patch changes this so
we have both a wireless-tools-dev and a libiw-dev package.
Perhaps instead we should just add:
PKG_${PN}-dev = "libiw-dev"
PKG_${PN}-staticdev = "libiw-staticdev"
?
Do we even care about that renaming?
Likewise, does it need two separate docs packages? or separate -dbg
packages?
We really need to work out the approach to these fundamental questions
before we can then look at the series...
I think I'm in favour of minimising the number of split
-dev/-dbg/-staticdev/-doc packages out there and hence I therefore am
uncomfortable with the direction the series is taking.
Cheers,
Richard
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-13 10:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-13 7:33 [PATCH V2 00/25] Static Library Updated Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 01/25] bitbake.conf: Add *-config to default ${PN}-dev package Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 02/25] shlibpackaging.bbclass: create common class Saul Wold
2011-07-13 9:17 ` Phil Blundell
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 03/25] pciutils: repackage development files in pciutils instead of libpci Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 04/25] wireless-tools: Updated for staticdevpackaging Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 05/25] augeas: inherit shlibpackaging class Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 06/25] gamin: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 07/25] sqlite3: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 08/25] curl: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 9:14 ` Phil Blundell
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 09/25] attr: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 10/25] rpm: Create -staticdev package Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 11/25] libxft: use default bitbake.conf FILES Packaging to handle staticdev Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 12/25] js: Use bitbake default FILES for packaging Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 13/25] tcp-wrappers: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 14/25] udev: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 9:38 ` Phil Blundell
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 15/25] liba52: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 16/25] python: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 17/25] external-csl-toolchain: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 18/25] opkg: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 19/25] util-linux: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 20/25] gettext: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 21/25] gcc: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 11:43 ` Phil Blundell
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 22/25] glibc: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 23/25] eglibc: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 24/25] uclibc: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 7:33 ` [PATCH V2 25/25] binutils: " Saul Wold
2011-07-13 10:07 ` Richard Purdie [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1310551676.20015.1094.camel@rex \
--to=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox