Re: [PATCH] bzip2-native: fix problems when bzip2-native is installed in parallel

[Richard Purdie <rpurdie@rpsys.net>]

On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 14:32 -0400, Yao Zhao wrote:
> On 12-07-24 12:00 PM, Yao Zhao wrote:
> > On 12-07-24 11:34 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 14:57 +0100, Burton, Ross wrote:
> >>> On 24 July 2012 14:49, Yao Zhao <yao.zhao@windriver.com> wrote:
> >>>> when bzip2-native is installed in parallel to sysroot, it is 
> >>>> possible that
> >>>> some packages are using bzip2 to unpack, there are chances that 
> >>>> bzip2 is
> >>>> installed to sysroot but libbz2.so.0 not installed yet because 
> >>>> parallel
> >>>> installation.
> >>>> link bzip2 and bzip2recover statically to avoid this problem and 
> >>>> don't lose
> >>>> parallel installation. libbz2.so is still available.
> >>> Is it me, or is this officially getting silly?  This probably happens
> >>> for *every* binary in the sysroot that links to a library, which is
> >>> probably a fair proportion of them.  Statically linking every single
> >>> one and then special-casing further problems where a static link isn't
> >>> sufficient (see pythonnative) just isn't going to scale.
> >> It happens for things in ASSUME_PROVIDED so there is only a finite list
> >> of these issues. I'm curious what is actually triggering bzip2-native to
> >> build given its in ASSUME_PROVIDED...
> > Yeah, it is in the ASSUME_PROVIDED but somehow it was built too. I 
> > will take a further look at why it was built.
> >
> It seems that python-native is depending on "bzip2-full-native" and 
> bzip2 does provide this "bzip2-full-native".
> Change it from "bzip2-full-native" to "bzip2-native" , bzip2-native is 
> not built any more. The code may not check the
> Why we need the bzip2-full-native? any idea?

See my other reply but I think its libbz2 that it wants.

Cheers,

Richard