[PATCH v3 1/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: change EXTRA_OECONF -> EXTRA_OEMESON

[PATCH v3 1/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: change EXTRA_OECONF -> EXTRA_OEMESON

[Anuj Mittal]

Use the correct variable so options actually get used and
use the correct qt option name to prevent errors.

Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
---
 meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
index 1b4db19..f3e0cee 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[x11]        = "${X11ENABLEOPTS},${X11DISABLEOPTS},${X11DEPENDS}"
 # This is better done in a separate qt5 layer (which then should add a "qt5" packageconfig
 # in a gstreamer1.0-plugins-good bbappend).
 
-EXTRA_OECONF += " \
+EXTRA_OEMESON += " \
     -Daalib=disabled \
     -Ddirectsound=disabled \
     -Ddv=disabled \
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ EXTRA_OECONF += " \
     -Doss4=disabled \
     -Dosxaudio=disabled \
     -Dosxvideo=disabled \
-    -Dqt=disabled \
+    -Dqt5=disabled \
     -Dshout2=disabled \
     -Dtwolame=disabled \
     -Dwaveform=disabled \
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Anuj Mittal]

Instead of disabling unconditionally, add PACKAGECONFIG for
qt5. Imported from meta-qt5 layer.

Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
---
 .../gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb                  | 7 +------
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
index f3e0cee..8b34111 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[libpng]     = "-Dpng=enabled,-Dpng=disabled,libpng"
 PACKAGECONFIG[libv4l2]    = "-Dv4l2-libv4l2=enabled,-Dv4l2-libv4l2=disabled,v4l-utils"
 PACKAGECONFIG[mpg123]     = "-Dmpg123=enabled,-Dmpg123=disabled,mpg123"
 PACKAGECONFIG[pulseaudio] = "-Dpulse=enabled,-Dpulse=disabled,pulseaudio"
+PACKAGECONFIG[qt5]        = "-Dqt5=enabled,-Dqt5=disabled,qtbase qtdeclarative qtbase-native"
 PACKAGECONFIG[soup]       = "-Dsoup=enabled,-Dsoup=disabled,libsoup-2.4"
 PACKAGECONFIG[speex]      = "-Dspeex=enabled,-Dspeex=disabled,speex"
 PACKAGECONFIG[taglib]     = "-Dtaglib=enabled,-Dtaglib=disabled,taglib"
@@ -50,11 +51,6 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[vpx]        = "-Dvpx=enabled,-Dvpx=disabled,libvpx"
 PACKAGECONFIG[wavpack]    = "-Dwavpack=enabled,-Dwavpack=disabled,wavpack"
 PACKAGECONFIG[x11]        = "${X11ENABLEOPTS},${X11DISABLEOPTS},${X11DEPENDS}"
 
-# qt5 support is disabled, because it is not present in OE core, and requires more work than
-# just adding a packageconfig (it requires access to moc, uic, rcc, and qmake paths).
-# This is better done in a separate qt5 layer (which then should add a "qt5" packageconfig
-# in a gstreamer1.0-plugins-good bbappend).
-
 EXTRA_OEMESON += " \
     -Daalib=disabled \
     -Ddirectsound=disabled \
@@ -64,7 +60,6 @@ EXTRA_OEMESON += " \
     -Doss4=disabled \
     -Dosxaudio=disabled \
     -Dosxvideo=disabled \
-    -Dqt5=disabled \
     -Dshout2=disabled \
     -Dtwolame=disabled \
     -Dwaveform=disabled \
-- 
2.7.4

✗ patchtest: failure for "[v3] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good..." and 1 more

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: "[v3] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good..." and 1 more
Revision: 1
URL   : https://patchwork.openembedded.org/series/22812/
State : failure

== Summary ==


Thank you for submitting this patch series to OpenEmbedded Core. This is
an automated response. Several tests have been executed on the proposed
series by patchtest resulting in the following failures:



* Issue             Series does not apply on top of target branch [test_series_merge_on_head] 
  Suggested fix    Rebase your series on top of targeted branch
  Targeted branch  master (currently at 10c2216cb6)



If you believe any of these test results are incorrect, please reply to the
mailing list (openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org) raising your concerns.
Otherwise we would appreciate you correcting the issues and submitting a new
version of the patchset if applicable. Please ensure you add/increment the
version number when sending the new version (i.e. [PATCH] -> [PATCH v2] ->
[PATCH v3] -> ...).

---
Guidelines:     https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines
Test framework: http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/patchtest
Test suite:     http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/patchtest-oe

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:41:58AM +0800, Anuj Mittal wrote:
> Instead of disabling unconditionally, add PACKAGECONFIG for
> qt5. Imported from meta-qt5 layer.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
> ---
>  .../gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb                  | 7 +------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> index f3e0cee..8b34111 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[libpng]     = "-Dpng=enabled,-Dpng=disabled,libpng"
>  PACKAGECONFIG[libv4l2]    = "-Dv4l2-libv4l2=enabled,-Dv4l2-libv4l2=disabled,v4l-utils"
>  PACKAGECONFIG[mpg123]     = "-Dmpg123=enabled,-Dmpg123=disabled,mpg123"
>  PACKAGECONFIG[pulseaudio] = "-Dpulse=enabled,-Dpulse=disabled,pulseaudio"
> +PACKAGECONFIG[qt5]        = "-Dqt5=enabled,-Dqt5=disabled,qtbase qtdeclarative qtbase-native"

Does it make oe-core depend on meta-qt5 layer?

What is the policy here for having inter-layer dependencies in DEPENDS vs. 
PACKAGECONFIG without explicitly listing them in LAYERDEPENDS?

-- 
Denys


>  PACKAGECONFIG[soup]       = "-Dsoup=enabled,-Dsoup=disabled,libsoup-2.4"
>  PACKAGECONFIG[speex]      = "-Dspeex=enabled,-Dspeex=disabled,speex"
>  PACKAGECONFIG[taglib]     = "-Dtaglib=enabled,-Dtaglib=disabled,taglib"
> @@ -50,11 +51,6 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[vpx]        = "-Dvpx=enabled,-Dvpx=disabled,libvpx"
>  PACKAGECONFIG[wavpack]    = "-Dwavpack=enabled,-Dwavpack=disabled,wavpack"
>  PACKAGECONFIG[x11]        = "${X11ENABLEOPTS},${X11DISABLEOPTS},${X11DEPENDS}"
>  
> -# qt5 support is disabled, because it is not present in OE core, and requires more work than
> -# just adding a packageconfig (it requires access to moc, uic, rcc, and qmake paths).
> -# This is better done in a separate qt5 layer (which then should add a "qt5" packageconfig
> -# in a gstreamer1.0-plugins-good bbappend).
> -
>  EXTRA_OEMESON += " \
>      -Daalib=disabled \
>      -Ddirectsound=disabled \
> @@ -64,7 +60,6 @@ EXTRA_OEMESON += " \
>      -Doss4=disabled \
>      -Dosxaudio=disabled \
>      -Dosxvideo=disabled \
> -    -Dqt5=disabled \
>      -Dshout2=disabled \
>      -Dtwolame=disabled \
>      -Dwaveform=disabled \
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 13:58 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:41:58AM +0800, Anuj Mittal wrote:
> > Instead of disabling unconditionally, add PACKAGECONFIG for
> > qt5. Imported from meta-qt5 layer.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  .../gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > good_1.16.2.bb                  | 7 +------
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-
> > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> > index f3e0cee..8b34111 100644
> > --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > good_1.16.2.bb
> > +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > good_1.16.2.bb
> > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[libpng]     = "-Dpng=enabled,-
> > Dpng=disabled,libpng"
> >  PACKAGECONFIG[libv4l2]    = "-Dv4l2-libv4l2=enabled,-Dv4l2-
> > libv4l2=disabled,v4l-utils"
> >  PACKAGECONFIG[mpg123]     = "-Dmpg123=enabled,-
> > Dmpg123=disabled,mpg123"
> >  PACKAGECONFIG[pulseaudio] = "-Dpulse=enabled,-
> > Dpulse=disabled,pulseaudio"
> > +PACKAGECONFIG[qt5]        = "-Dqt5=enabled,-Dqt5=disabled,qtbase
> > qtdeclarative qtbase-native"
> 
> Does it make oe-core depend on meta-qt5 layer?
> 
> What is the policy here for having inter-layer dependencies in
> DEPENDS vs. PACKAGECONFIG without explicitly listing them in
> LAYERDEPENDS?

We have a clear policy that listing such options is ok as long as its
not enabled by default.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:07:44PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 13:58 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:41:58AM +0800, Anuj Mittal wrote:
> > > Instead of disabling unconditionally, add PACKAGECONFIG for
> > > qt5. Imported from meta-qt5 layer.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  .../gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > good_1.16.2.bb                  | 7 +------
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-
> > > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> > > index f3e0cee..8b34111 100644
> > > --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[libpng]     = "-Dpng=enabled,-
> > > Dpng=disabled,libpng"
> > >  PACKAGECONFIG[libv4l2]    = "-Dv4l2-libv4l2=enabled,-Dv4l2-
> > > libv4l2=disabled,v4l-utils"
> > >  PACKAGECONFIG[mpg123]     = "-Dmpg123=enabled,-
> > > Dmpg123=disabled,mpg123"
> > >  PACKAGECONFIG[pulseaudio] = "-Dpulse=enabled,-
> > > Dpulse=disabled,pulseaudio"
> > > +PACKAGECONFIG[qt5]        = "-Dqt5=enabled,-Dqt5=disabled,qtbase
> > > qtdeclarative qtbase-native"
> > 
> > Does it make oe-core depend on meta-qt5 layer?
> > 
> > What is the policy here for having inter-layer dependencies in
> > DEPENDS vs. PACKAGECONFIG without explicitly listing them in
> > LAYERDEPENDS?
> 
> We have a clear policy that listing such options is ok as long as its
> not enabled by default.

Richard,

This is good, thank you for confirming. Do you have a link where this is 
clearly explained? Thanks again.

-- 
Denys

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:12 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:07:44PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 13:58 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:41:58AM +0800, Anuj Mittal wrote:
> > > > Instead of disabling unconditionally, add PACKAGECONFIG for
> > > > qt5. Imported from meta-qt5 layer.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  .../gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > good_1.16.2.bb                  | 7 +------
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-
> > > > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > index f3e0cee..8b34111 100644
> > > > --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[libpng]     = "-Dpng=enabled,-
> > > > Dpng=disabled,libpng"
> > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[libv4l2]    = "-Dv4l2-libv4l2=enabled,-Dv4l2-
> > > > libv4l2=disabled,v4l-utils"
> > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[mpg123]     = "-Dmpg123=enabled,-
> > > > Dmpg123=disabled,mpg123"
> > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[pulseaudio] = "-Dpulse=enabled,-
> > > > Dpulse=disabled,pulseaudio"
> > > > +PACKAGECONFIG[qt5]        = "-Dqt5=enabled,-
> > > > Dqt5=disabled,qtbase
> > > > qtdeclarative qtbase-native"
> > > 
> > > Does it make oe-core depend on meta-qt5 layer?
> > > 
> > > What is the policy here for having inter-layer dependencies in
> > > DEPENDS vs. PACKAGECONFIG without explicitly listing them in
> > > LAYERDEPENDS?
> > 
> > We have a clear policy that listing such options is ok as long as
> > its
> > not enabled by default.
> 
> Richard,
> 
> This is good, thank you for confirming. Do you have a link where this
> is clearly explained? Thanks again.

Its come up many times over the years and we've been consistent about
it. I don't have a link but there has been mailing list discussion and
perhaps TSC discussion long ago, I simply don't remember. There are
many examples of that in OE-Core.

The alternative is forcing more into bbappends which doesn't seem to
gain anything (PACKAGECONFIG itself could be changed from distro config
for example).

Its also easy to catch bad defaults since the recipes would no longer
parse due to missing dependencies which we'd quickly spot.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:15:51PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:12 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:07:44PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 13:58 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:41:58AM +0800, Anuj Mittal wrote:
> > > > > Instead of disabling unconditionally, add PACKAGECONFIG for
> > > > > qt5. Imported from meta-qt5 layer.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  .../gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > > good_1.16.2.bb                  | 7 +------
> > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-
> > > > > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > index f3e0cee..8b34111 100644
> > > > > --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[libpng]     = "-Dpng=enabled,-
> > > > > Dpng=disabled,libpng"
> > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[libv4l2]    = "-Dv4l2-libv4l2=enabled,-Dv4l2-
> > > > > libv4l2=disabled,v4l-utils"
> > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[mpg123]     = "-Dmpg123=enabled,-
> > > > > Dmpg123=disabled,mpg123"
> > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[pulseaudio] = "-Dpulse=enabled,-
> > > > > Dpulse=disabled,pulseaudio"
> > > > > +PACKAGECONFIG[qt5]        = "-Dqt5=enabled,-
> > > > > Dqt5=disabled,qtbase
> > > > > qtdeclarative qtbase-native"
> > > > 
> > > > Does it make oe-core depend on meta-qt5 layer?
> > > > 
> > > > What is the policy here for having inter-layer dependencies in
> > > > DEPENDS vs. PACKAGECONFIG without explicitly listing them in
> > > > LAYERDEPENDS?
> > > 
> > > We have a clear policy that listing such options is ok as long as
> > > its
> > > not enabled by default.
> > 
> > Richard,
> > 
> > This is good, thank you for confirming. Do you have a link where this
> > is clearly explained? Thanks again.
> 
> Its come up many times over the years and we've been consistent about
> it. I don't have a link but there has been mailing list discussion and
> perhaps TSC discussion long ago, I simply don't remember. There are
> many examples of that in OE-Core.
> 
> The alternative is forcing more into bbappends which doesn't seem to
> gain anything (PACKAGECONFIG itself could be changed from distro config
> for example).
> 
> Its also easy to catch bad defaults since the recipes would no longer
> parse due to missing dependencies which we'd quickly spot.

Richard,

Yes, yes, I understanf all that from a technical perspective and agree with 
it, but I was thinking about a more clear definition of this policy to be able 
to point anyone having such questions in the future...

-- 
Denys

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 02:33:19PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:15:51PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:12 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:07:44PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 13:58 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:41:58AM +0800, Anuj Mittal wrote:
> > > > > > Instead of disabling unconditionally, add PACKAGECONFIG for
> > > > > > qt5. Imported from meta-qt5 layer.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >  .../gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb                  | 7 +------
> > > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > > plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-
> > > > > > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > index f3e0cee..8b34111 100644
> > > > > > --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[libpng]     = "-Dpng=enabled,-
> > > > > > Dpng=disabled,libpng"
> > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[libv4l2]    = "-Dv4l2-libv4l2=enabled,-Dv4l2-
> > > > > > libv4l2=disabled,v4l-utils"
> > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[mpg123]     = "-Dmpg123=enabled,-
> > > > > > Dmpg123=disabled,mpg123"
> > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[pulseaudio] = "-Dpulse=enabled,-
> > > > > > Dpulse=disabled,pulseaudio"
> > > > > > +PACKAGECONFIG[qt5]        = "-Dqt5=enabled,-
> > > > > > Dqt5=disabled,qtbase
> > > > > > qtdeclarative qtbase-native"
> > > > > 
> > > > > Does it make oe-core depend on meta-qt5 layer?
> > > > > 
> > > > > What is the policy here for having inter-layer dependencies in
> > > > > DEPENDS vs. PACKAGECONFIG without explicitly listing them in
> > > > > LAYERDEPENDS?
> > > > 
> > > > We have a clear policy that listing such options is ok as long as
> > > > its
> > > > not enabled by default.
> > > 
> > > Richard,
> > > 
> > > This is good, thank you for confirming. Do you have a link where this
> > > is clearly explained? Thanks again.
> > 
> > Its come up many times over the years and we've been consistent about
> > it. I don't have a link but there has been mailing list discussion and
> > perhaps TSC discussion long ago, I simply don't remember. There are
> > many examples of that in OE-Core.
> > 
> > The alternative is forcing more into bbappends which doesn't seem to
> > gain anything (PACKAGECONFIG itself could be changed from distro config
> > for example).
> > 
> > Its also easy to catch bad defaults since the recipes would no longer
> > parse due to missing dependencies which we'd quickly spot.
> 
> Richard,
> 
> Yes, yes, I understanf all that from a technical perspective and agree with 
> it, but I was thinking about a more clear definition of this policy to be able 
> to point anyone having such questions in the future...

BTW, I don't remember discussing this at YP TSC... Maybe OE TSC covered this 
in the past?

-- 
Denys

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:33 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:15:51PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:12 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:07:44PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 13:58 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:41:58AM +0800, Anuj Mittal wrote:
> > > > > > Instead of disabling unconditionally, add PACKAGECONFIG for
> > > > > > qt5. Imported from meta-qt5 layer.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >  .../gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb                  | 7 +------
> > > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-
> > > > > > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > > plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-
> > > > > > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > index f3e0cee..8b34111 100644
> > > > > > --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > > plugins-
> > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > > plugins-
> > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[libpng]     = "-
> > > > > > Dpng=enabled,-
> > > > > > Dpng=disabled,libpng"
> > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[libv4l2]    = "-Dv4l2-libv4l2=enabled,-
> > > > > > Dv4l2-
> > > > > > libv4l2=disabled,v4l-utils"
> > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[mpg123]     = "-Dmpg123=enabled,-
> > > > > > Dmpg123=disabled,mpg123"
> > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[pulseaudio] = "-Dpulse=enabled,-
> > > > > > Dpulse=disabled,pulseaudio"
> > > > > > +PACKAGECONFIG[qt5]        = "-Dqt5=enabled,-
> > > > > > Dqt5=disabled,qtbase
> > > > > > qtdeclarative qtbase-native"
> > > > > 
> > > > > Does it make oe-core depend on meta-qt5 layer?
> > > > > 
> > > > > What is the policy here for having inter-layer dependencies
> > > > > in
> > > > > DEPENDS vs. PACKAGECONFIG without explicitly listing them in
> > > > > LAYERDEPENDS?
> > > > 
> > > > We have a clear policy that listing such options is ok as long
> > > > as
> > > > its
> > > > not enabled by default.
> > > 
> > > Richard,
> > > 
> > > This is good, thank you for confirming. Do you have a link where
> > > this
> > > is clearly explained? Thanks again.
> > 
> > Its come up many times over the years and we've been consistent
> > about
> > it. I don't have a link but there has been mailing list discussion
> > and
> > perhaps TSC discussion long ago, I simply don't remember. There are
> > many examples of that in OE-Core.
> > 
> > The alternative is forcing more into bbappends which doesn't seem
> > to
> > gain anything (PACKAGECONFIG itself could be changed from distro
> > config
> > for example).
> > 
> > Its also easy to catch bad defaults since the recipes would no
> > longer
> > parse due to missing dependencies which we'd quickly spot.
> 
> Yes, yes, I understanf all that from a technical perspective and
> agree with it, but I was thinking about a more clear definition of
> this policy to be able to point anyone having such questions in the
> future...

Sure, that sounds great. This doesn't happen without someone doing it
though.

I have not looked at the wiki to see if we did already document it. I
guess you already searched there before asking the question. If we
don't have a policy documented, you can edit the wiki and add something
?

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:43 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 02:33:19PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:15:51PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:12 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:07:44PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 13:58 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:41:58AM +0800, Anuj Mittal
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Instead of disabling unconditionally, add PACKAGECONFIG
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > qt5. Imported from meta-qt5 layer.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >  .../gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb                  | 7 +------
> > > > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-
> > > > > > > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > > > plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-
> > > > > > > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > > index f3e0cee..8b34111 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > > > plugins-
> > > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > > +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > > > plugins-
> > > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[libpng]     = "-
> > > > > > > Dpng=enabled,-
> > > > > > > Dpng=disabled,libpng"
> > > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[libv4l2]    = "-Dv4l2-libv4l2=enabled,-
> > > > > > > Dv4l2-
> > > > > > > libv4l2=disabled,v4l-utils"
> > > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[mpg123]     = "-Dmpg123=enabled,-
> > > > > > > Dmpg123=disabled,mpg123"
> > > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[pulseaudio] = "-Dpulse=enabled,-
> > > > > > > Dpulse=disabled,pulseaudio"
> > > > > > > +PACKAGECONFIG[qt5]        = "-Dqt5=enabled,-
> > > > > > > Dqt5=disabled,qtbase
> > > > > > > qtdeclarative qtbase-native"
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Does it make oe-core depend on meta-qt5 layer?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > What is the policy here for having inter-layer dependencies
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > DEPENDS vs. PACKAGECONFIG without explicitly listing them
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > LAYERDEPENDS?
> > > > > 
> > > > > We have a clear policy that listing such options is ok as
> > > > > long as
> > > > > its
> > > > > not enabled by default.
> > > > 
> > > > Richard,
> > > > 
> > > > This is good, thank you for confirming. Do you have a link
> > > > where this
> > > > is clearly explained? Thanks again.
> > > 
> > > Its come up many times over the years and we've been consistent
> > > about
> > > it. I don't have a link but there has been mailing list
> > > discussion and
> > > perhaps TSC discussion long ago, I simply don't remember. There
> > > are
> > > many examples of that in OE-Core.
> > > 
> > > The alternative is forcing more into bbappends which doesn't seem
> > > to
> > > gain anything (PACKAGECONFIG itself could be changed from distro
> > > config
> > > for example).
> > > 
> > > Its also easy to catch bad defaults since the recipes would no
> > > longer
> > > parse due to missing dependencies which we'd quickly spot.
> > 
> > Richard,
> > 
> > Yes, yes, I understanf all that from a technical perspective and
> > agree with 
> > it, but I was thinking about a more clear definition of this policy
> > to be able 
> > to point anyone having such questions in the future...
> 
> BTW, I don't remember discussing this at YP TSC... Maybe OE TSC
> covered this in the past?

Metadata architecture decision would be the OE TSC and "TSC discussion
long ago" means something from several years ago.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:29:42PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:43 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 02:33:19PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:15:51PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:12 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:07:44PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 13:58 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:41:58AM +0800, Anuj Mittal
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > Instead of disabling unconditionally, add PACKAGECONFIG
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > qt5. Imported from meta-qt5 layer.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anuj.mittal@intel.com>
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > >  .../gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-
> > > > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb                  | 7 +------
> > > > > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-
> > > > > > > > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > > > > plugins-good_1.16.2.bb b/meta/recipes-
> > > > > > > > multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-plugins-good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > > > index f3e0cee..8b34111 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > > > > plugins-
> > > > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > > > +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/gstreamer/gstreamer1.0-
> > > > > > > > plugins-
> > > > > > > > good_1.16.2.bb
> > > > > > > > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ PACKAGECONFIG[libpng]     = "-
> > > > > > > > Dpng=enabled,-
> > > > > > > > Dpng=disabled,libpng"
> > > > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[libv4l2]    = "-Dv4l2-libv4l2=enabled,-
> > > > > > > > Dv4l2-
> > > > > > > > libv4l2=disabled,v4l-utils"
> > > > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[mpg123]     = "-Dmpg123=enabled,-
> > > > > > > > Dmpg123=disabled,mpg123"
> > > > > > > >  PACKAGECONFIG[pulseaudio] = "-Dpulse=enabled,-
> > > > > > > > Dpulse=disabled,pulseaudio"
> > > > > > > > +PACKAGECONFIG[qt5]        = "-Dqt5=enabled,-
> > > > > > > > Dqt5=disabled,qtbase
> > > > > > > > qtdeclarative qtbase-native"
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Does it make oe-core depend on meta-qt5 layer?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > What is the policy here for having inter-layer dependencies
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > DEPENDS vs. PACKAGECONFIG without explicitly listing them
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > LAYERDEPENDS?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > We have a clear policy that listing such options is ok as
> > > > > > long as
> > > > > > its
> > > > > > not enabled by default.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Richard,
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is good, thank you for confirming. Do you have a link
> > > > > where this
> > > > > is clearly explained? Thanks again.
> > > > 
> > > > Its come up many times over the years and we've been consistent
> > > > about
> > > > it. I don't have a link but there has been mailing list
> > > > discussion and
> > > > perhaps TSC discussion long ago, I simply don't remember. There
> > > > are
> > > > many examples of that in OE-Core.
> > > > 
> > > > The alternative is forcing more into bbappends which doesn't seem
> > > > to
> > > > gain anything (PACKAGECONFIG itself could be changed from distro
> > > > config
> > > > for example).
> > > > 
> > > > Its also easy to catch bad defaults since the recipes would no
> > > > longer
> > > > parse due to missing dependencies which we'd quickly spot.
> > > 
> > > Richard,
> > > 
> > > Yes, yes, I understanf all that from a technical perspective and
> > > agree with 
> > > it, but I was thinking about a more clear definition of this policy
> > > to be able 
> > > to point anyone having such questions in the future...
> > 
> > BTW, I don't remember discussing this at YP TSC... Maybe OE TSC
> > covered this in the past?
> 
> Metadata architecture decision would be the OE TSC and "TSC discussion
> long ago" means something from several years ago.

Thought so - were there any meeting minutes from back then? Sorry for being so 
persistent, just trying to find some paper trail... :)

-- 
Denys

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 15:32 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:29:42PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:43 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 02:33:19PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko
> > > wrote:
> > > > Richard,
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, yes, I understanf all that from a technical perspective
> > > > and
> > > > agree with 
> > > > it, but I was thinking about a more clear definition of this
> > > > policy
> > > > to be able 
> > > > to point anyone having such questions in the future...
> > > 
> > > BTW, I don't remember discussing this at YP TSC... Maybe OE TSC
> > > covered this in the past?
> > 
> > Metadata architecture decision would be the OE TSC and "TSC
> > discussion
> > long ago" means something from several years ago.
> 
> Thought so - were there any meeting minutes from back then? Sorry for
> being so 
> persistent, just trying to find some paper trail... :)

Yes, there is a record. You can find it quite easily. I don't need to
do this for you...

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:57:27PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 15:32 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:29:42PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:43 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 02:33:19PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Richard,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yes, yes, I understanf all that from a technical perspective
> > > > > and
> > > > > agree with 
> > > > > it, but I was thinking about a more clear definition of this
> > > > > policy
> > > > > to be able 
> > > > > to point anyone having such questions in the future...
> > > > 
> > > > BTW, I don't remember discussing this at YP TSC... Maybe OE TSC
> > > > covered this in the past?
> > > 
> > > Metadata architecture decision would be the OE TSC and "TSC
> > > discussion
> > > long ago" means something from several years ago.
> > 
> > Thought so - were there any meeting minutes from back then? Sorry for
> > being so 
> > persistent, just trying to find some paper trail... :)
> 
> Yes, there is a record. You can find it quite easily. I don't need to
> do this for you...

All I could find is OE TSC minutes from 7 May 2013 referring to some related 
list discussion:

https://lists.openembedded.org/g/tsc/message/369?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,PACKAGECONFIG,20,2,0,72188707

(9:47:21 AM) RP: bluelightning: I think this was to PACKAGECONFIG more recipes
(9:47:28 AM) bluelightning: ah ok
(9:47:36 AM) RP: bluelightning: remove the need to bbappend, have
people set mode config options
(9:47:51 AM) bluelightning: and PACKAGECONFIG to enable deps on things
outside OE-Core as well presumably
(9:48:01 AM) bluelightning: (as discussed on the ml a few weeks ago)
(9:48:06 AM) fray: yup

I spent last couple hours digging through my archives of openembedded-core and 
openembedded-devel lists around that time (Spring 2013), but besides general 
move to enable PACKAGECONFIG in recipes, I didn't see anything specific about 
crossing layer boundaries by PACKAGECONFIG dependencies, unfortunately. And it 
was a wild time - all the energy, extra activity, conflicts, flamewars - that 
definitely brought up some memories re-reading those discussions again... :)


BTW, all the links on this page are now dead, since they point to the old 
mailman/pipermail archives:
https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/TSC

Michael,

Is there any way to correct the links in bulk or preserve the old archives, so 
the old links would still work?

-- 
Denys

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 18:12 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:57:27PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 15:32 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:29:42PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:43 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 02:33:19PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Richard,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Yes, yes, I understanf all that from a technical
> > > > > > perspective
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > agree with 
> > > > > > it, but I was thinking about a more clear definition of
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > policy
> > > > > > to be able 
> > > > > > to point anyone having such questions in the future...
> > > > > 
> > > > > BTW, I don't remember discussing this at YP TSC... Maybe OE
> > > > > TSC
> > > > > covered this in the past?
> > > > 
> > > > Metadata architecture decision would be the OE TSC and "TSC
> > > > discussion
> > > > long ago" means something from several years ago.
> > > 
> > > Thought so - were there any meeting minutes from back then? Sorry
> > > for
> > > being so 
> > > persistent, just trying to find some paper trail... :)
> > 
> > Yes, there is a record. You can find it quite easily. I don't need
> > to
> > do this for you...
> 
> All I could find is OE TSC minutes from 7 May 2013 referring to some
> related 
> list discussion:
> 
> https://lists.openembedded.org/g/tsc/message/369?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,PACKAGECONFIG,20,2,0,72188707
> 
> (9:47:21 AM) RP: bluelightning: I think this was to PACKAGECONFIG
> more recipes
> (9:47:28 AM) bluelightning: ah ok
> (9:47:36 AM) RP: bluelightning: remove the need to bbappend, have
> people set mode config options
> (9:47:51 AM) bluelightning: and PACKAGECONFIG to enable deps on
> things
> outside OE-Core as well presumably
> (9:48:01 AM) bluelightning: (as discussed on the ml a few weeks ago)
> (9:48:06 AM) fray: yup

Well found. There is clearly more context behind that even back then.

> I spent last couple hours digging through my archives of
> openembedded-core and 
> openembedded-devel lists around that time (Spring 2013), but besides
> general move to enable PACKAGECONFIG in recipes, I didn't see
> anything specific about crossing layer boundaries by PACKAGECONFIG
> dependencies, unfortunately. And it was a wild time - all the energy,
> extra activity, conflicts, flamewars - that definitely brought up
> some memories re-reading those discussions again... :)

:)

I'm sure this has been discussed, I just don't remember where/when
unfortunately.

I do believe the conclusion is right though and I believe there is
enough general acceptance we can document it as such. If anyone
objects, the TSC can discuss it but I'm not seeing that being requested
unless there is more context to this discussion than I'm seeing.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:37:25PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 18:12 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:57:27PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 15:32 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:29:42PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:43 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > All I could find is OE TSC minutes from 7 May 2013 referring to some
> > related 
> > list discussion:
> > 
> > https://lists.openembedded.org/g/tsc/message/369?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,PACKAGECONFIG,20,2,0,72188707
> > 
> > (9:47:21 AM) RP: bluelightning: I think this was to PACKAGECONFIG
> > more recipes
> > (9:47:28 AM) bluelightning: ah ok
> > (9:47:36 AM) RP: bluelightning: remove the need to bbappend, have
> > people set mode config options
> > (9:47:51 AM) bluelightning: and PACKAGECONFIG to enable deps on
> > things
> > outside OE-Core as well presumably
> > (9:48:01 AM) bluelightning: (as discussed on the ml a few weeks ago)
> > (9:48:06 AM) fray: yup
> 
> Well found. There is clearly more context behind that even back then.
> 
> > I spent last couple hours digging through my archives of
> > openembedded-core and 
> > openembedded-devel lists around that time (Spring 2013), but besides
> > general move to enable PACKAGECONFIG in recipes, I didn't see
> > anything specific about crossing layer boundaries by PACKAGECONFIG
> > dependencies, unfortunately. And it was a wild time - all the energy,
> > extra activity, conflicts, flamewars - that definitely brought up
> > some memories re-reading those discussions again... :)
> 
> :)
> 
> I'm sure this has been discussed, I just don't remember where/when
> unfortunately.
> 
> I do believe the conclusion is right though and I believe there is
> enough general acceptance we can document it as such. If anyone
> objects, the TSC can discuss it but I'm not seeing that being requested
> unless there is more context to this discussion than I'm seeing.

Richard,

So, the policy issue is all sorted out now...

But how one would use this change in a multi-machine distro, when some 
machines have graphics and want qt5+gl dependencies, while other machines 
have no graphics and cannot build qt5+gl. Is there a way to keep this 
package generic w/o making it machine-specific PACKAGE_ARCH=MACHINE_ARCH?

-- 
Denys

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] gstreamer1.0-plugins-good: add qt5 PACKAGECONFIG

[Richard Purdie]

On Sun, 2020-04-12 at 14:46 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:37:25PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 18:12 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:57:27PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 15:32 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:29:42PM +0000, Richard Purdie
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:43 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > All I could find is OE TSC minutes from 7 May 2013 referring to
> > > some
> > > related 
> > > list discussion:
> > > 
> > > https://lists.openembedded.org/g/tsc/message/369?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,PACKAGECONFIG,20,2,0,72188707
> > > 
> > > (9:47:21 AM) RP: bluelightning: I think this was to PACKAGECONFIG
> > > more recipes
> > > (9:47:28 AM) bluelightning: ah ok
> > > (9:47:36 AM) RP: bluelightning: remove the need to bbappend, have
> > > people set mode config options
> > > (9:47:51 AM) bluelightning: and PACKAGECONFIG to enable deps on
> > > things
> > > outside OE-Core as well presumably
> > > (9:48:01 AM) bluelightning: (as discussed on the ml a few weeks
> > > ago)
> > > (9:48:06 AM) fray: yup
> > 
> > Well found. There is clearly more context behind that even back
> > then.
> > 
> > > I spent last couple hours digging through my archives of
> > > openembedded-core and 
> > > openembedded-devel lists around that time (Spring 2013), but
> > > besides
> > > general move to enable PACKAGECONFIG in recipes, I didn't see
> > > anything specific about crossing layer boundaries by
> > > PACKAGECONFIG
> > > dependencies, unfortunately. And it was a wild time - all the
> > > energy,
> > > extra activity, conflicts, flamewars - that definitely brought up
> > > some memories re-reading those discussions again... :)
> > 
> > :)
> > 
> > I'm sure this has been discussed, I just don't remember where/when
> > unfortunately.
> > 
> > I do believe the conclusion is right though and I believe there is
> > enough general acceptance we can document it as such. If anyone
> > objects, the TSC can discuss it but I'm not seeing that being
> > requested
> > unless there is more context to this discussion than I'm seeing.
> 
> Richard,
> 
> So, the policy issue is all sorted out now...
> 
> But how one would use this change in a multi-machine distro, when
> some 
> machines have graphics and want qt5+gl dependencies, while other
> machines 
> have no graphics and cannot build qt5+gl. Is there a way to keep
> this 
> package generic w/o making it machine-specific
> PACKAGE_ARCH=MACHINE_ARCH?

The distro could setup the package feeds so there was a package feed
with gl and a package feed without gl?

The tune files ultimately determine the default PACKAGE_ARCH but there
is nothing stopping the distro from changing that to gl and non-gl
variants...

Cheers,

Richard