From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([93.97.175.187]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TyVqu-0007bb-MP for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 00:05:01 +0100 Received: from localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id r0OMrXtm031031; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:53:33 GMT X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at dan.rpsys.net Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id rmXmhaPZuYob; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:53:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.3.10] (rpvlan0 [192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id r0OMrQD8031025 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:53:29 GMT Message-ID: <1359067749.3616.23.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Chris Larson Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:49:09 +0000 In-Reply-To: References: <2ba0f6007c1a72e2ee249a47610003031f6c1079.1359061155.git.raj.khem@gmail.com> <1359064215.3616.20.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.2-0ubuntu0.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: oe-core layer , Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] libpcap: Add missing libusb dependency X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 23:05:01 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2013-01-24 at 15:42 -0700, Chris Larson wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Richard Purdie > wrote: > > Do we need libusb support in libpcap? What does this > dependency buy us > > and couldn't we force it off instead? > > > its needed to support canusb in libpcap, I would say yes we > should > support it but disabling it would be ok too although all my > builds > were silently using libusb so I think unknowingly may be but > we are > already shipping with canusb support. > > I'd personally prefer it disabled, but I'd think at the very least it > should be a PACKAGECONFIG entry, whether its included in the default > value of PACKAGECONFIG itself or not. > Agreed, PACKAGECONFIG, default off is the way to go with this IMO too. Cheers, Richard