From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RQQxg-0002hK-Dh for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 22:54:36 +0100 Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Nov 2011 13:48:12 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,351,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="75808968" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.12.41]) ([10.255.12.41]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Nov 2011 13:48:12 -0800 Message-ID: <4EC2DE1B.3070904@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 13:48:11 -0800 From: Joshua Lock User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110930 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org References: <1320761883.10843.40.camel@ted> <4EC2B797.4010503@linux.intel.com> <1321393116.26881.229.camel@ted> In-Reply-To: <1321393116.26881.229.camel@ted> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] Recipe upgrades, fixes and additions X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 21:54:36 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 15/11/11 13:38, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 11:03 -0800, Saul Wold wrote: >> On 11/08/2011 06:18 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: >>> On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 16:10 -0800, Joshua Lock wrote: >>>> All, >>>> >>>> Here's a series of patches I developed whilst trying to play around with some >>>> Clutter based software. >>>> >>>> The interesting pieces may be: >>>> Clutter 1.8 series recipes - do we want/need to keep clutter 1.6 around? >>>> Are we OK with continuing to namespace the clutter recipes by clutter >>>> version? >>> >>> Yes, I think this makes sense. >> >> Why do we want to continue the clutter the namespace with version >> numbers? Was this not for a past issue with mis-matched API/ABI? >> >> If that problem is solved, then next remove that version info. > > Clutter produces libraries with a very specific namespace so you can > parallel install clutter 1.4, 1.6 and 1.8. Applications compile against > a given version of the library. > > Having the major lib version as part of the package name therefore makes > sense. There aren't a lot of projects that do this but this one does and > it continues to make sense to namespace it accordingly. With this knowledge "in hand" I've just re-read the 1.8 release notes[1] and, for better or for worse, this is no longer the case: " * This version is API and ABI compatible with the current stable release of Clutter. * Installing the contents of this release will overwrite the files from the installation of the current release of Clutter. " For point 1 I'd added a patch to PROVIDES = "clutter-1.6" but I'm not sure what makes sense in the context of point 2. Cheers, Joshua 1. http://www.clutter-project.org/blogs/archive/2011-09/clutter-1.8.0-stable-release -- Joshua Lock Yocto Project "Johannes factotum" Intel Open Source Technology Centre