From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ea0-f178.google.com (mail-ea0-f178.google.com [209.85.215.178]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F8A26D74F for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 16:20:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ea0-f178.google.com with SMTP id d10so2380222eaj.9 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 08:20:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=gJDnJc21S3Hp5APml0RM20nMZ5lKYkWdtodMcO8HZ2g=; b=CIA4MtQ0bEsfLXwp0CxSYNOcbgppMUug7HLZX1TOKKWUAJZEP6LiVPclT1WxtENY6w YmOBt+ELxTkltt5wOSp6DuEpnLAjPfqSQ6DYneKpgtJ/WBwuL4B8HCbQyx21/e8y66f3 uKlLXgzZhtb83VFXo8bRXF6QMH8jtO6qdbs7EKi1GYC03CNZTPswJiX5sa0xWWRgIvsi QvVCjBjd+Ww54SEOWckfZcmOPw6MT1uzv25xOYPRys5Y75t/iHLamhg+CoR5eP0GqdNb aYqEXDFfhKayC202LcWE/w19UlYtAz38isXhKsBq3mJeZNLimUih7iZ23MKdldBarFt9 0ulA== X-Received: by 10.15.61.134 with SMTP id i6mr4304290eex.48.1384791614913; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 08:20:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (ip-89-176-104-107.net.upcbroadband.cz. [89.176.104.107]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id g47sm39310421eeo.19.2013.11.18.08.20.13 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 18 Nov 2013 08:20:14 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 17:20:14 +0100 From: Martin Jansa To: Paul Barker Message-ID: <20131118162014.GH3727@jama> References: <52898177.5000303@windriver.com> <20131118114000.GB3727@jama> <1384775852.6460.214.camel@ted> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) Cc: openembedded-core Subject: Re: opkg dependencies and update-alternatives 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: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 16:20:14 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 47236 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kH8JNVvasRCCW1Oz" Content-Disposition: inline --kH8JNVvasRCCW1Oz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 03:31:09PM +0000, Paul Barker wrote: > On 18 November 2013 11:57, Richard Purdie > wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-11-18 at 12:40 +0100, Martin Jansa wrote: > >> > >> FWIW: current u-a implementation provided by opkg is in OE-classic and > >> was in older poky/oe-core provided also in standalone recipe > >> update-alternatives-cworth > >> > >> http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded/tree/recipes/update-alternati= ves/update-alternatives-cworth_0.99.154.bb > >> > >> commit 44b538eedab7c255051fa3375f9f2439cd2db3dd > >> Author: Marcin Juszkiewicz > >> Date: Wed Mar 19 15:36:01 2008 +0000 > >> > >> update-alternatives-cworth: dropped as they are now generated with= opkg recipe > > > > Turning this back into a standalone recipe might be worthwhile and seems > > like the best way to address the problems. > > > > Paul: Have you any opinion of moving update-alternatives to its own > > repository separate from opkg? or just check it into OE-Core as its just > > a single script? Its not as if it really needs much from opkg at this > > point? >=20 > I'd be quite happy to break it out into a separate repo. I think > that's better than direct inclusion into oe-core so that it remains > easily usable by non-oe systems. What about including it in opkg-utils repo? And maybe even providing u-a by opkg-utils.bb? opkg-utils.bb doesn't have any DEPENDS (Only python RDEPENDS) so it would be good compromise between opkg and completely new recipe. > > > > I'm also wondering how it compares to the dpkg version (which is C > > iirc). Should we switch to that? Does it give better performance? > > >=20 > The dpkg version does have more features but the dpkg recipe in > oe-core says that it can't provide > "virtual/update-alternative-native". I think the reason there is that > it doesn't support installing to an offline target filesystem. I don't > know how the performance compares but I don't think it's critical as > it isn't a program that will be running very often on a target. The > opkg version is probably more lightweight as it is a short shell > script vs the 2,700 lines of C which make up the dpkg version. >=20 > There is also an "alternatives" program in chkconfig which is listed > as a possible provider of "virtual/update-alternatives" but again, > trying to use in causes a dependency loop. I haven't given this > version more than a quick glance though. >=20 > Personally I'd say the dpkg version looks the best as it allows a user > or script to query or change which alternative is selected whereas the > opkg version only allows alternatives to be installed or removed. It > would just need someone with the time to look into how it can be made > to install links to a target filesystem rather than to the host > filesystem. Unfortunately that isn't me at the moment. >=20 > --=20 > Paul Barker >=20 > Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk > http://www.paulbarker.me.uk --=20 Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com --kH8JNVvasRCCW1Oz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEUEARECAAYFAlKKPj4ACgkQN1Ujt2V2gBzewACWK2DEpb08pNYd0phDdl2brM9A 3gCeLK4PmtyB/y1pJjY2JkAS0WlR/5E= =Ggw1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --kH8JNVvasRCCW1Oz--