From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-f42.google.com (mail-wg0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA5646AC6C for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2014 11:26:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f42.google.com with SMTP id l18so5435427wgh.1 for ; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 04:26:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=mVR5/MhKeW14//OGU3Tx0vJoDIlfRVZav2pI8x8+rAo=; b=kVI3g766ba4eL4q06axWfMHhlBfZMkQMKnQSJC1oR4WEbYPtaptbUDPXLO+Kmx69qt txG350pZGyXuTU7myooFWgtgxiKgzrh78IUKLq0/Rlu7HfHz8Iz7lkbRdOkD/eQBIhDC Idwf6UpfA6sbZ06ewJGAeu30SSihsbxEnJEhi9rQdw41jvtIP7AwcUHiMMfaGrJzonRb PkXaOdBLkRXYF2WDdUKI05YG/oHuLCaZcaZkrqrKKEFl2ODxMfpl7nQerJ/Wbs3DFAV9 PPTKzhyyQBNkoQBVWSiEY4ycUDIyvVuSUDJNDCAo4Y982YdvRriv24NG0mTlV+Htjhi/ IW2Q== X-Received: by 10.194.158.101 with SMTP id wt5mr2224294wjb.136.1407497216603; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 04:26:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (ygg.betafive.co.uk. [5.9.90.21]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id j5sm16698475wjf.35.2014.08.08.04.26.55 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 08 Aug 2014 04:26:55 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Paul Barker Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 11:26:53 +0000 From: Paul Barker To: Martin Jansa Message-ID: <20140808112653.GG32767@gmail.com> References: <20140723135123.GA32767@gmail.com> <20140723144952.GG22875@jama> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20140723144952.GG22875@jama> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: OE Core Subject: Re: gpgme-config 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: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 11:26:58 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 56145 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ZYOWEO2dMm2Af3e3" Content-Disposition: inline --ZYOWEO2dMm2Af3e3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:49:52PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 01:51:23PM +0000, Paul Barker wrote: > > Hi all, > >=20 > > I'm trying to build opkg with 'gpg' added to PACKAGECONFIG on the maste= r branch > > of OE. The gpg support for opkg is provided by gpgme, which uses 'gpgme= -config' > > to determine CFLAGS and LIBS when building. After recent changes, the > > gpgme-config script is now just a dummy and doesn't do anything. > >=20 > > Upstream gpgme do not provide a pkg-config file and an upstream issue a= bout this > > raised in 2012 was resolved WONTFIX (https://bugs.g10code.com/gnupg/iss= ue1414). > >=20 > > Our options are: > >=20 > > 1) Add a .pc file to gpgme and maintain it within OE as it is very unli= kely to > > be accepted upstream. Then I need to modify configure.ac in opkg to = support > > both this pkg-config file (for OE) and the gpgme-config utility (for= all > > other users of opkg). >=20 > This comment in original issue: > The gpgme-config scripts goes along with the gpgme.m4 code. A .pc file > won't be able to do what we can do with this combination. >=20 > Makes me think that if we implement .pc.in which generates correct .pc > from gpgme.m4 he won't be against accepting such patch upstream. >=20 > I think that biggest reason against -config scripts was that they aren't > cross-compile friendly (not sysroot-aware) so you either have whole path > to sysroot hardcoded in -config file and then have to mangle it for > target -dev package or vice versa and you need to prefix returned values > (like -I -L flags with sysroot). > =20 > > 2) Make an exception to the policy on -config scripts for gpgme. > >=20 > > I haven't really followed the discussion on why -config scripts needed = to be > > removed so I'll put this question to other OE developers. Would option = (2) cause > > more problems in the long run? If so, is it worth the extra effort to f= ollow > > option (1)? > >=20 > > I'll probably need someone to bounce a few autoconf and pkg-config ques= tions off > > if I implement option (1) as I'm not very familiar with either system. >=20 > I'm no expert in this as well, but there are some examples we can copy. >=20 I think I've got this now. I've created a 'gpgme.pc' file by adapting 'lua.= pc' =66rom meta-openembedded. The Libs and Cflags were found by running 'gpgme-= config' on my development machine and they seem fairly sensible. I've then used PKG_CHECK_MODULES() in 'configure.ac' within opkg to find gpgme using that pkg-config file. I'll send in a couple of patches but I'll delay the changes to 'configure.a= c' in opkg. I should be releasing opkg-0.2.3 in the next few weeks and that will include the necessary changes. Thanks, --=20 Paul Barker Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk http://www.paulbarker.me.uk --ZYOWEO2dMm2Af3e3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJT5LP9AAoJEBwoJlo7UPQD2HwH/RyMs06/JUK9N+3Upail5Cem 7UeuDYMfsTWjTwO/dZiknyrzKpYSBNy9Pj7koEv5QzKnEOocal2lzO6HxOd0W/O5 W2MYAL0RS7oSYzvJ8FjrkRYEyL1YDrS9vG9pNNidd7Wxg4wZOML3bPzS4w/LLomy r9VT2djGBJy4V9+Wi3uR1LB/V7bRf4kKMDbarSS9CCDwXncdv/PaxowBpABDYFy4 r1YQm0tNaoFOMua32FVQnEt61UuGcexK0IZGWIkeWvZuuyE84MgUvjhY48GIL3jy pciNmGaXlgPAV+acuf/i+7EQ6rrxDbmWoY5dEwEzUT1CORN2s8W/fQX3BTh7kck= =4LAp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ZYOWEO2dMm2Af3e3--