Re: [RESEND PATCH v3] util-linux: create util-linux-runuser package

[Ioan-Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@ni.com>]

On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 15:52:50 +1300
Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 12:03:03 Ioan-Adrian Ratiu wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:34:12 +0000
> > 
> > "Burton, Ross" <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > On 15 December 2015 at 09:49, Ioan-Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@ni.com>   
> wrote:
> > > > Split runuser into its own package (previously provided by util-linux).
> > > > Since runuser is compiled only when DISTRO_FEATURES includes pam,
> > > > the creation of util-linux-runuser is also constrained by this.  
> > > 
> > > What's the rationale for pulling this out into a separate package?  
> > 
> > I need runuser on a busybox image and can't install the entire util-linux
> > package.  
> > > >  PACKAGES += "${@bb.utils.contains('PACKAGECONFIG', 'pylibmount',
> > > > 
> > > > 'util-linux-pylibmount', '', d)}"
> > > > +PACKAGES =+ "${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'pam',
> > > > 'util-linux-runuser', '', d)}"  
> > > 
> > > No need for conditionals: empty packages are not created.  
> > 
> > Thank you for this tip, I've modified and sent v4.  
> 
> Unfortunately this wasn't right - the package being excluded from PACKAGES was 
> serving to avoid the libpam dependency when pam was not in DISTRO_FEATURES; as 
> of this patch we are now building it unconditionally leading to a warning.
> 
> Ioan-Adrian, could you please send a patch that changes it back to how you had 
> it in v3?

Yes, I'll send v5 which will revert the change from v4.

> 
> Thanks,
> Paul
>