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 1SMj3U-00032g-6d for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:57:32 +0200 Received: from elite.brightsigndigital.co.uk ([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 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SMiuF-0001Jy-Ko for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:47:59 +0200 From: Phil Blundell To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:47:58 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1335285237.21409.19.camel@ted> References: <857BE142E5399E46B20FD45B9DB8A7BC0FD735E3@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <1335260575.27021.64.camel@phil-desktop> <1335264349.12692.120.camel@ted> <1335264491.27021.66.camel@phil-desktop> <1335285237.21409.19.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.2- Message-ID: <1335286079.27021.102.camel@phil-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: is the virtual package -tanslation correct? 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: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:57:32 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 17:33 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 11:48 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 11:45 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > > > On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 10:42 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > > > > Yes, that is the intended behaviour. This is necessary to support > > > > dynamically installed language packs. > > > > > > What uses this out of interest? > > > > I'm not entirely sure to be honest. We used to use it quite heavily in > > Familiar but I have no idea whether Angstrom does the same. The systems > > I'm working on nowadays don't tend to require language packs so I > > haven't personally used that mechanism for a while. > > How did the system use this? I can imagine querying the list of > installed packages and then attempting installing xx-locale as a resuilt > but I'm not sure how this other provider helps? > > As far as I know, opkg doesn't directly support anything like this? Ipkg did have (and I assume opkg still has, though I haven't checked) a "greedy depends" mechanism which works exactly like this. If it sees a line like: Recommends: xx-locale* then it will install all the packages which Provide: xx-locale and whose dependencies are already satisfied. The way we used this in Familiar was that the .ipk containing message catalogs for language CC and package PN would Provide: PN-locale, CC-translation, and would Depend: on PN and locale-base-CC. PN itself would Recommend: PN-locale*, and there was a language-pack-CC metapackage which would Depend: on locale-base-cc and Recommend: CC-translation*. So... - if you did "ipkg install language-pack-de", it would install locale-base-de (via the hard Depends) and then install PN-locale-de for each PN that was already installed (via the Recommends). - if you did "ipkg install frozen-bubble", it would install the program itself (obviously) and then install the message catalogs for all the locale-bases that were already installed. Likewise, if you subsequently removed locale-base-de or frozen-bubble then the dependency chain would cause all the corresponding message catalogs to get ripped out as well. Obviously this was about a decade ago so my recollection might not be 100% reliable. But I'm fairly sure that the basic gist of the above is correct. p.