From: Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com>
To: Otavio Salvador <otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br>
Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x11vnc: move recipe to meta-oe
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:41:55 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56211AC3.5020307@mlbassoc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP9ODKobJGbJ+ASvNqQ7Td1a28fyqXrn2idBKjZ-NCZoxj9Vsw@mail.gmail.com>
On 2015-10-16 09:29, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com> wrote:
>> On 2015-10-16 08:44, Martin Jansa wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 08:40:10AM -0600, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2015-10-16 08:25, Ioan-Adrian Ratiu wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> x11vnc can be configured with --use-system-libvncserver to use an
>>>>> external libvncserver which will be added to meta-oe. Since oe-core
>>>>> should not depend on meta-oe, we move x11vnc there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ioan-Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@ni.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just curious why not the other way - move libvncserver to OE-core?
>>>> x11vnc seems like one of the very few [and useful] X based tools that
>>>> are present in OE-core that it seems like a huge step backwards to
>>>> move it out.
>>>
>>>
>>> It was discussed in "[OE-core] [oe] [meta-oe][PATCH v2] meta-oe:
>>> recipes-graphics: add libvncserver recipe" thread and I agree with
>>> Otavio that x11vnc doesn't look so fundamental component used by most
>>> embedded builds to deserver being in the core.
>>
>> Well, I tend to disagree and I don't think there has really been a
>> discussion - only one "no" (Otavio) and one "I don't know" (Paul).
>
> The recipe being in meta-oe, can be used anyway. It is just out of OE-Core.
>
> Anyway, what x11vnc has to provide to a core system? it even requires
> X11 which a lot of embedded systems are moving away from...
>
Maybe for you, but not my customers - most of them insist on it.
Yes, x11nvc in meta-oe is an answer, but I don't want to have to
drag in meta-oe (way too heavy for my tastes) just to be able to
use it (I use it all the time to debug customer systems that I only
have remote access to)...
Maybe we should abandon Python or GDB (server) from OE-core as they
aren't used by all systems either??
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas | Consulting for the
MLB Associates | Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-16 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-16 14:25 [PATCH] x11vnc: move recipe to meta-oe Ioan-Adrian Ratiu
2015-10-16 14:40 ` Gary Thomas
2015-10-16 14:44 ` Martin Jansa
2015-10-16 15:21 ` Gary Thomas
2015-10-16 15:29 ` Otavio Salvador
2015-10-16 15:41 ` Gary Thomas [this message]
2015-10-16 15:48 ` Otavio Salvador
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56211AC3.5020307@mlbassoc.com \
--to=gary@mlbassoc.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
--cc=otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox