[PATCH] libcgroup: fix the QA issue for pam_cgroup.so*

[PATCH] libcgroup: fix the QA issue for pam_cgroup.so*

[Xin Ouyang]

pam modules in ${base_libdir}/security/ should be binary .so files,
not symlinks. So fix this QA issue.

Signed-off-by: Xin Ouyang <Xin.Ouyang@windriver.com>
---
 meta/recipes-core/libcgroup/libcgroup_0.37.1.bb |   17 ++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/libcgroup/libcgroup_0.37.1.bb b/meta/recipes-core/libcgroup/libcgroup_0.37.1.bb
index e74f831..5f2201a 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-core/libcgroup/libcgroup_0.37.1.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-core/libcgroup/libcgroup_0.37.1.bb
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ SECTION = "libs"
 LICENSE = "LGPLv2.1"
 LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=2d5025d4aa3495befef8f17206a5b0a1"
 
-PR = "r2"
+PR = "r3"
 
 inherit autotools pkgconfig
 
@@ -23,5 +23,16 @@ FILES_cgroups-pam-plugin = "${base_libdir}/security/pam_cgroup.so*"
 FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${base_libdir}/security/.debug"
 FILES_${PN}-dev += "${base_libdir}/security/*.la"
 
-# We really need the symlink so :(
-INSANE_SKIP_cgroups-pam-plugin = "dev-so"
+do_install_append() {
+	# Moving libcgroup to base_libdir
+	if [ ! ${D}${libdir} -ef ${D}${base_libdir} ]; then
+		mkdir -p ${D}/${base_libdir}/
+		mv -f ${D}${libdir}/libcgroup.so.* ${D}${base_libdir}/
+		ln -sf ${D}${base_libdir}/libcgroup.so.1 ${D}${libdir}/libcgroup.so
+	fi
+	# pam modules in ${base_libdir}/security/ should be binary .so files, not symlinks.
+	if [ -f ${D}${base_libdir}/security/pam_cgroup.so.0.0.0 ]; then
+		mv -f ${D}${base_libdir}/security/pam_cgroup.so.0.0.0 ${D}${base_libdir}/security/pam_cgroup.so
+		rm -f ${D}${base_libdir}/security/pam_cgroup.so.*
+	fi
+}
-- 
1.7.10.4

Re: [PATCH] libcgroup: fix the QA issue for pam_cgroup.so*

[Burton, Ross]

On 23 January 2013 02:31, Xin Ouyang <Xin.Ouyang@windriver.com> wrote:
> pam modules in ${base_libdir}/security/ should be binary .so files,
> not symlinks. So fix this QA issue.

The short log should explain the problem more than just "fix QA issue".

The commit log also doesn't say anything about moving libcgroup from
/usr/lib to /lib.  Also isn't just setting --libdir in EXTRA_OEMAKE
cleaner?

Finally, no PR bumps are needed in oe-core.

Ross

Re: [PATCH] libcgroup: fix the QA issue for pam_cgroup.so*

[Pascal Ouyang]

于 2013年01月23日 20:00, Burton, Ross 写道:
> On 23 January 2013 02:31, Xin Ouyang <Xin.Ouyang@windriver.com> wrote:
>> pam modules in ${base_libdir}/security/ should be binary .so files,
>> not symlinks. So fix this QA issue.
>
> The short log should explain the problem more than just "fix QA issue".
>
> The commit log also doesn't say anything about moving libcgroup from
> /usr/lib to /lib.  Also isn't just setting --libdir in EXTRA_OEMAKE
> cleaner?


You know pam_cgroup.so is installed into ${base_libdir}/security, this 
will cause "unsafe-references-in-binaries" QA issue if libcgroup.so.0 is 
installed into ${libdir}.

I will add this reason in V2.

I do not use --libdir because pkgconfig/dev-so files should always 
installed into ${libdir} instead of ${base_libdir}.

>
> Finally, no PR bumps are needed in oe-core.

Why no PR bumps needed?

Thanks. :)

- Pascal

>
> Ross
>
>


-- 
- Pascal

Re: [PATCH] libcgroup: fix the QA issue for pam_cgroup.so*

[Burton, Ross]

On 24 January 2013 06:28, Pascal Ouyang <xin.ouyang@windriver.com> wrote:
> I do not use --libdir because pkgconfig/dev-so files should always installed
> into ${libdir} instead of ${base_libdir}.

Good point.

>> Finally, no PR bumps are needed in oe-core.
>
> Why no PR bumps needed?

Because oe-core assumes the PR service is being used.  Search the list
for that term for more background.

Ross