Re: [PATCH 05/11] udev (165): move ConsoleKit support to udev-consolekit package

Re: [PATCH 05/11] udev (165): move ConsoleKit support to udev-consolekit package

[Koen Kooi]

Op 12 mrt 2011, om 21:21 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:

> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 16:27, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> ...
>> -PACKAGES =+ "libudev libgudev udev-utils"
>> +PACKAGES =+ "libudev libgudev udev-utils udev-consolekit"
> ...
> 
> Koen, can you take a look on this change?
> 
> It seems Angstrom is the only used of this version and seems better to
> not provide support for consolekit by default so adding it as
> recommends or suggests seems wrong to me.

If someone can quickly explain me what it does then we can see what needs to get changed. Without having looked into it I think adding RRECOMMENDS_${PN} += "udev-consolekit" to the consolekit recipe should fix most possible breakage.

Adding oe-core to CC:

What are the plans in oe-core for udev? There currently is a recipe overlayed in meta-oe because I haven't had time to look into the differences between the oe-dev and oe-core version. If we're going to touch udev we might as well do it properly :)


regards,

Koen

Re: [PATCH 05/11] udev (165): move ConsoleKit support to udev-consolekit package

[Otavio Salvador]

On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 19:03, Koen Kooi <koen@beagleboard.org> wrote:
> If someone can quickly explain me what it does then we can see what needs to get changed. Without having looked into it I think adding RRECOMMENDS_${PN} += "udev-consolekit" to the consolekit recipe should fix most possible breakage.

I think it manages to register the 'seat' on consolekit. So I think
this would solve this issue.

> Adding oe-core to CC:
>
> What are the plans in oe-core for udev? There currently is a recipe overlayed in meta-oe because I haven't had time to look into the differences between the oe-dev and oe-core version. If we're going to touch udev we might as well do it properly :)

I think 165 ought to be our base there.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: [PATCH 05/11] udev (165): move ConsoleKit support to udev-consolekit package

[Tom Rini]

On 03/12/2011 03:03 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
> Op 12 mrt 2011, om 21:21 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 16:27, Otavio Salvador<otavio@ossystems.com.br>  wrote:
>> ...
>>> -PACKAGES =+ "libudev libgudev udev-utils"
>>> +PACKAGES =+ "libudev libgudev udev-utils udev-consolekit"
>> ...
>>
>> Koen, can you take a look on this change?
>>
>> It seems Angstrom is the only used of this version and seems better to
>> not provide support for consolekit by default so adding it as
>> recommends or suggests seems wrong to me.
>
> If someone can quickly explain me what it does then we can see what needs to get changed. Without having looked into it I think adding RRECOMMENDS_${PN} += "udev-consolekit" to the consolekit recipe should fix most possible breakage.
>
> Adding oe-core to CC:
>
> What are the plans in oe-core for udev? There currently is a recipe overlayed in meta-oe because I haven't had time to look into the differences between the oe-dev and oe-core version. If we're going to touch udev we might as well do it properly :)

Not sure off hand yet, but udev is one of the things we might need to 
keep a few versions around of, depending on how far back we want to 
support kernels out of the box.

-- 
Tom Rini
Mentor Graphics Corporation

Re: [PATCH 05/11] udev (165): move ConsoleKit support to udev-consolekit package

[Khem Raj]

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Tom Rini <tom_rini@mentor.com> wrote:
> On 03/12/2011 03:03 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>> Op 12 mrt 2011, om 21:21 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 16:27, Otavio Salvador<otavio@ossystems.com.br>
>>>  wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> -PACKAGES =+ "libudev libgudev udev-utils"
>>>> +PACKAGES =+ "libudev libgudev udev-utils udev-consolekit"
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Koen, can you take a look on this change?
>>>
>>> It seems Angstrom is the only used of this version and seems better to
>>> not provide support for consolekit by default so adding it as
>>> recommends or suggests seems wrong to me.
>>
>> If someone can quickly explain me what it does then we can see what needs
>> to get changed. Without having looked into it I think adding
>> RRECOMMENDS_${PN} += "udev-consolekit" to the consolekit recipe should fix
>> most possible breakage.
>>
>> Adding oe-core to CC:
>>
>> What are the plans in oe-core for udev? There currently is a recipe
>> overlayed in meta-oe because I haven't had time to look into the differences
>> between the oe-dev and oe-core version. If we're going to touch udev we
>> might as well do it properly :)
>
> Not sure off hand yet, but udev is one of the things we might need to keep a
> few versions around of, depending on how far back we want to support kernels
> out of the box.
>

I would think this should be recommended into BSP layers then

> --
> Tom Rini
> Mentor Graphics Corporation
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>

Re: [PATCH 05/11] udev (165): move ConsoleKit support to udev-consolekit package

[Tom Rini]

On 03/14/2011 11:00 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Tom Rini<tom_rini@mentor.com>  wrote:
>> On 03/12/2011 03:03 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>
>>> Op 12 mrt 2011, om 21:21 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 16:27, Otavio Salvador<otavio@ossystems.com.br>
>>>>   wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> -PACKAGES =+ "libudev libgudev udev-utils"
>>>>> +PACKAGES =+ "libudev libgudev udev-utils udev-consolekit"
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> Koen, can you take a look on this change?
>>>>
>>>> It seems Angstrom is the only used of this version and seems better to
>>>> not provide support for consolekit by default so adding it as
>>>> recommends or suggests seems wrong to me.
>>>
>>> If someone can quickly explain me what it does then we can see what needs
>>> to get changed. Without having looked into it I think adding
>>> RRECOMMENDS_${PN} += "udev-consolekit" to the consolekit recipe should fix
>>> most possible breakage.
>>>
>>> Adding oe-core to CC:
>>>
>>> What are the plans in oe-core for udev? There currently is a recipe
>>> overlayed in meta-oe because I haven't had time to look into the differences
>>> between the oe-dev and oe-core version. If we're going to touch udev we
>>> might as well do it properly :)
>>
>> Not sure off hand yet, but udev is one of the things we might need to keep a
>> few versions around of, depending on how far back we want to support kernels
>> out of the box.
>
> I would think this should be recommended into BSP layers then

I wouldn't since we don't want every BSP to have to "re-invent" the udev 
wheel.  And there's other bits of userspace where there's a relationship 
between the kernel version (the whole kernel headers version and iirc 
hipox machines thread on oe-devel).

I'm not saying we need to keep every version of udev either, I'm just 
saying we know where there's cutoff points and we should have correct 
and maintained udev versions in the core.

-- 
Tom Rini
Mentor Graphics Corporation