From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dan.rpsys.net (dan.rpsys.net [93.97.175.187]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C38FD65DB9 for ; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 10:08:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu4) with ESMTP id s39A8FSK026609; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 11:08:25 +0100 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 H90eLXZ9Nlcn; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 11:08:25 +0100 (BST) 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 s39A8IZ7026598 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 9 Apr 2014 11:08:20 +0100 Message-ID: <1397038093.24597.140.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Ming Liu Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 11:08:13 +0100 In-Reply-To: <53451A86.3020308@windriver.com> References: <1396870039-26834-1-git-send-email-ming.liu@windriver.com> <1396870039-26834-3-git-send-email-ming.liu@windriver.com> <1396870587.24597.35.camel@ted> <53435E81.9060308@windriver.com> <1396951390.24597.88.camel@ted> <5344EB93.1070209@windriver.com> <1397036562.24597.139.camel@ted> <53451A86.3020308@windriver.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] binconfig.bbclass: fix multilib file conflicts X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 10:08:31 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 18:01 +0800, Ming Liu wrote: > On 04/09/2014 05:42 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 14:41 +0800, Ming Liu wrote: > >> On 04/08/2014 06:03 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > >>> On Tue, 2014-04-08 at 10:27 +0800, Ming Liu wrote: > >>>> On 04/07/2014 07:36 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 19:27 +0800, Ming Liu wrote: > >>>>>> In most cases binconfig files conflict among multilib packages, to avoid > >>>>>> that, use update-alternatives link *-config from real path with a > >>>>>> PACKAGE_ARCH suffix. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ming Liu > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> meta/classes/binconfig.bbclass | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > >>>>>> 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >>>>> This isn't going in, its complex and supports a minority use case. > >>>>> binconfig should be dying out, not being extended and shored up like > >>>>> this. > >>>>> > >>>>> I'd also add this patch is buggy, its pure luck that update-alternatives > >>>>> is available at rootfs generation time since its not in a visible > >>>>> dependency. > >>>>> > >>>>> So going forward I'd like to see patches which simply delete binconfig > >>>>> scripts. Where there isn't a .pc alternative we should be adding them > >>>>> and pushing them upstream. > >>>> Did you mean we'd better remove all *-config scripts, insteaded by > >>>> providing .pc files, and send the changes to all upstreams providing and > >>>> using *-config? That seems a huge work and we need co-operate with a lot > >>>> of projects. > >>> Basically, yes, that is what I mean. I might be wrong but I don't think > >>> there are that many projects which don't ship .pc files now and just > >>> have a binconfig as a backup. > >> Yes, I also noticed that many of them are providing .pc files as well as > >> binconfig as a backup, so I think there must be reasons binconfig > >> remained in their projects, that might be for compliable considering, > >> so I am not sure they would like to remove them from their projects, but > >> I can try to ping them. Nevertheless, the conflicts still exist, we just > >> leave them here so far? > > I'm thinking we should start deleting the -config files at do_install > > time where we know a good .pc file exists and remove the binconfig > > inherit. If this causes any problem in software using the package, we > > should fix those to use pkgconfig. > > > > Over time the conflicts will stop existing since the binconfig class > > will not be used anywhere. > Yes, that's a feasible solution, but it needs a lot of testing works, > unfortunately, I am a little busy with my daily work recently and cant > handle it parallelly, so I'd like to file a bug in Yocto, see if anybody > like to take it, or I will do it when I can tear myself away from work > later. Agreed, I'm not asking you personally to do all of this, just suggesting that ultimately this is the route we need to take. Cheers, Richard