[PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Gary Thomas]

Improve the packaging of the libraries built by this recipe.  These
are created using special code in the recipe and the debug (-dbg)
packages were not being created.  Adding these packages allow the
libraries in question to be debugged using GDB.

Signed-off-by: Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com>
---
 meta/recipes-multimedia/ffmpeg/ffmpeg_2.8.5.bb | 10 +++++++++-
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/ffmpeg/ffmpeg_2.8.5.bb b/meta/recipes-multimedia/ffmpeg/ffmpeg_2.8.5.bb
index 7107803..524b5cb 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/ffmpeg/ffmpeg_2.8.5.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/ffmpeg/ffmpeg_2.8.5.bb
@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ do_configure() {
 }
 
 RSUGGESTS_${PN} = "mplayer"
-PACKAGES_DYNAMIC += "^lib(av(codec|device|filter|format|util)|swscale).*"
+PACKAGES_DYNAMIC += "^lib(av(codec|device|filter|format|util)|postproc|swresample|swscale).*"
 
 python populate_packages_prepend() {
     av_libdir = d.expand('${libdir}')
@@ -108,4 +108,12 @@ python populate_packages_prepend() {
                       prepend=True,
                       allow_links=True)
 
+    # Debug packages (-dbg)
+    do_split_packages(d, av_libdir, '^lib(.*)\.so$',
+                      output_pattern='lib%s-dbg',
+                      description='libav %s debug package',
+                      extra_depends='${PN}-dbg',
+                      prepend=True,
+                      allow_links=True)
+
 }
-- 
2.5.0

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Richard Purdie]

On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 04:58 +0100, Gary Thomas wrote:
> Improve the packaging of the libraries built by this recipe.  These
> are created using special code in the recipe and the debug (-dbg)
> packages were not being created.  Adding these packages allow the
> libraries in question to be debugged using GDB.

This isn't really policy, the policy is one -dbg package per recipe and
that is how the dependency chains and dbg-pkgs in IMAGE_FEATURES work
and so on.

I'm not arguing this is perfect, its not and I would like to see it
change. It is how it all works today though. Is there a pressing reason
we need to do something different here?

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Gary Thomas]

On 2016-02-12 09:17, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 04:58 +0100, Gary Thomas wrote:
>> Improve the packaging of the libraries built by this recipe.  These
>> are created using special code in the recipe and the debug (-dbg)
>> packages were not being created.  Adding these packages allow the
>> libraries in question to be debugged using GDB.
>
> This isn't really policy, the policy is one -dbg package per recipe and
> that is how the dependency chains and dbg-pkgs in IMAGE_FEATURES work
> and so on.
>
> I'm not arguing this is perfect, its not and I would like to see it
> change. It is how it all works today though. Is there a pressing reason
> we need to do something different here?

Without this change, none of the [renamed] libraries generated by
the ffmpeg recipe have debug symbols available.  As is, the recipe
is generating separate -dev packages for each library - how is that
different [policy-wise]?

Should the -dev and -dbg info for the libraries be bundled into
ffmpeg-dbg and ffmpeg-dev?  Or perhaps the machinations generating
the -dev packages in that recipe are just wrong?

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Richard Purdie]

On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 09:29 +0100, Gary Thomas wrote:
> On 2016-02-12 09:17, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 04:58 +0100, Gary Thomas wrote:
> > > Improve the packaging of the libraries built by this recipe. 
> > >  These
> > > are created using special code in the recipe and the debug (-dbg)
> > > packages were not being created.  Adding these packages allow the
> > > libraries in question to be debugged using GDB.
> > 
> > This isn't really policy, the policy is one -dbg package per recipe
> > and
> > that is how the dependency chains and dbg-pkgs in IMAGE_FEATURES
> > work
> > and so on.
> > 
> > I'm not arguing this is perfect, its not and I would like to see it
> > change. It is how it all works today though. Is there a pressing
> > reason
> > we need to do something different here?
> 
> Without this change, none of the [renamed] libraries generated by
> the ffmpeg recipe have debug symbols available.  As is, the recipe
> is generating separate -dev packages for each library - how is that
> different [policy-wise]?
> 
> Should the -dev and -dbg info for the libraries be bundled into
> ffmpeg-dbg and ffmpeg-dev?  Or perhaps the machinations generating
> the -dev packages in that recipe are just wrong?

There should only be one -dev package too.

As you saying the debug symbols are getting placed into the -dev
packages? They must be getting placed and hence packaged somewhere?

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Gary Thomas]

On 2016-02-12 09:32, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 09:29 +0100, Gary Thomas wrote:
>> On 2016-02-12 09:17, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 04:58 +0100, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>> Improve the packaging of the libraries built by this recipe.
>>>>   These
>>>> are created using special code in the recipe and the debug (-dbg)
>>>> packages were not being created.  Adding these packages allow the
>>>> libraries in question to be debugged using GDB.
>>>
>>> This isn't really policy, the policy is one -dbg package per recipe
>>> and
>>> that is how the dependency chains and dbg-pkgs in IMAGE_FEATURES
>>> work
>>> and so on.
>>>
>>> I'm not arguing this is perfect, its not and I would like to see it
>>> change. It is how it all works today though. Is there a pressing
>>> reason
>>> we need to do something different here?
>>
>> Without this change, none of the [renamed] libraries generated by
>> the ffmpeg recipe have debug symbols available.  As is, the recipe
>> is generating separate -dev packages for each library - how is that
>> different [policy-wise]?
>>
>> Should the -dev and -dbg info for the libraries be bundled into
>> ffmpeg-dbg and ffmpeg-dev?  Or perhaps the machinations generating
>> the -dev packages in that recipe are just wrong?
>
> There should only be one -dev package too.
>
> As you saying the debug symbols are getting placed into the -dev
> packages? They must be getting placed and hence packaged somewhere?

I'm not sure where they were going before this change.

It does look like this recipe is packaging things incorrectly, at
least against policy.  I think the biggest thing they were attempting
to achieve was packaging of static development libraries (*.a) in
their own packages.  Should all of this just be in ffmpeg-dev?

I could try just disabling their special packaging and see how well
it works.


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Gary Thomas]

On 2016-02-12 09:37, Gary Thomas wrote:
> On 2016-02-12 09:32, Richard Purdie wrote:
>> On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 09:29 +0100, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>> On 2016-02-12 09:17, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 04:58 +0100, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>>> Improve the packaging of the libraries built by this recipe.
>>>>>   These
>>>>> are created using special code in the recipe and the debug (-dbg)
>>>>> packages were not being created.  Adding these packages allow the
>>>>> libraries in question to be debugged using GDB.
>>>>
>>>> This isn't really policy, the policy is one -dbg package per recipe
>>>> and
>>>> that is how the dependency chains and dbg-pkgs in IMAGE_FEATURES
>>>> work
>>>> and so on.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not arguing this is perfect, its not and I would like to see it
>>>> change. It is how it all works today though. Is there a pressing
>>>> reason
>>>> we need to do something different here?
>>>
>>> Without this change, none of the [renamed] libraries generated by
>>> the ffmpeg recipe have debug symbols available.  As is, the recipe
>>> is generating separate -dev packages for each library - how is that
>>> different [policy-wise]?
>>>
>>> Should the -dev and -dbg info for the libraries be bundled into
>>> ffmpeg-dbg and ffmpeg-dev?  Or perhaps the machinations generating
>>> the -dev packages in that recipe are just wrong?
>>
>> There should only be one -dev package too.
>>
>> As you saying the debug symbols are getting placed into the -dev
>> packages? They must be getting placed and hence packaged somewhere?
>
> I'm not sure where they were going before this change.
>
> It does look like this recipe is packaging things incorrectly, at
> least against policy.  I think the biggest thing they were attempting
> to achieve was packaging of static development libraries (*.a) in
> their own packages.  Should all of this just be in ffmpeg-dev?
>
> I could try just disabling their special packaging and see how well
> it works.
>
>

Policy notwithstanding, there are a lot of lib*-dbg* packages generated
by non-lib* recipes, so my solution doesn't seem so out of place to me.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 919 bytes --]

On 12 February 2016 at 03:58, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com> wrote:

> Improve the packaging of the libraries built by this recipe.  These
> are created using special code in the recipe and the debug (-dbg)
> packages were not being created.  Adding these packages allow the
> libraries in question to be debugged using GDB.
>

oe-pkgdata-utils says:

ffmpeg-dbg:
        /usr/bin/.debug/ffmpeg
        /usr/bin/.debug/ffprobe
        /usr/bin/.debug/ffserver
        /usr/lib/.debug/libavcodec.so.56.60.100
        /usr/lib/.debug/libavdevice.so.56.4.100
        /usr/lib/.debug/libavfilter.so.5.40.101
        /usr/lib/.debug/libavformat.so.56.40.101
        /usr/lib/.debug/libavutil.so.54.31.100
        /usr/lib/.debug/libpostproc.so.53.3.100
        /usr/lib/.debug/libswresample.so.1.2.101
        /usr/lib/.debug/libswscale.so.3.1.101

So I'm not sure why this would be needed.

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1906 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 677 bytes --]

On 12 February 2016 at 10:40, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com> wrote:

> Policy notwithstanding, there are a lot of lib*-dbg* packages generated
> by non-lib* recipes, so my solution doesn't seem so out of place to me.
>

Since da5ec06814e105451cca11cce76b5c5231110524 debug packages are populated
automagically into a single PN-dbg unless there's a good rationale (Qt has
a good rationale in that one of the libraries embeds WebKit, which makes
its debug symbols quite large).

This has been general policy for some time now and whilst other layers may
not do this, oe-core doesn't have any recipes that split into multiple dbg
packages anymore (afaict).

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1200 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Gary Thomas]

On 2016-02-12 11:49, Burton, Ross wrote:
>
> On 12 February 2016 at 03:58, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com <mailto:gary@mlbassoc.com>> wrote:
>
>     Improve the packaging of the libraries built by this recipe.  These
>     are created using special code in the recipe and the debug (-dbg)
>     packages were not being created.  Adding these packages allow the
>     libraries in question to be debugged using GDB.
>
>
> oe-pkgdata-utils says:
>
> ffmpeg-dbg:
>          /usr/bin/.debug/ffmpeg
>          /usr/bin/.debug/ffprobe
>          /usr/bin/.debug/ffserver
>          /usr/lib/.debug/libavcodec.so.56.60.100
>          /usr/lib/.debug/libavdevice.so.56.4.100
>          /usr/lib/.debug/libavfilter.so.5.40.101
>          /usr/lib/.debug/libavformat.so.56.40.101
>          /usr/lib/.debug/libavutil.so.54.31.100
>          /usr/lib/.debug/libpostproc.so.53.3.100
>          /usr/lib/.debug/libswresample.so.1.2.101
>          /usr/lib/.debug/libswscale.so.3.1.101
>
> So I'm not sure why this would be needed.
>

I'll check again, maybe it's as simple as ffmpeg-dbg wasn't
brought in as an automatic dependency of mplayer2-dbg although
a bunch of others were.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Gary Thomas]

On 2016-02-12 12:03, Gary Thomas wrote:
> On 2016-02-12 11:49, Burton, Ross wrote:
>>
>> On 12 February 2016 at 03:58, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com <mailto:gary@mlbassoc.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Improve the packaging of the libraries built by this recipe.  These
>>     are created using special code in the recipe and the debug (-dbg)
>>     packages were not being created.  Adding these packages allow the
>>     libraries in question to be debugged using GDB.
>>
>>
>> oe-pkgdata-utils says:
>>
>> ffmpeg-dbg:
>>          /usr/bin/.debug/ffmpeg
>>          /usr/bin/.debug/ffprobe
>>          /usr/bin/.debug/ffserver
>>          /usr/lib/.debug/libavcodec.so.56.60.100
>>          /usr/lib/.debug/libavdevice.so.56.4.100
>>          /usr/lib/.debug/libavfilter.so.5.40.101
>>          /usr/lib/.debug/libavformat.so.56.40.101
>>          /usr/lib/.debug/libavutil.so.54.31.100
>>          /usr/lib/.debug/libpostproc.so.53.3.100
>>          /usr/lib/.debug/libswresample.so.1.2.101
>>          /usr/lib/.debug/libswscale.so.3.1.101
>>
>> So I'm not sure why this would be needed.
>>
>
> I'll check again, maybe it's as simple as ffmpeg-dbg wasn't
> brought in as an automatic dependency of mplayer2-dbg although
> a bunch of others were.
>

That's definitely it.  When I install mplayer2-dbg which was has
ffmpeg in DEPENDS, the library debug info was not found and ffmpeg-dbg
was not installed:

# opkg install mplayer2-dbg
Installing mplayer2-dbg (2.0+gitr0+2c378c71a4-r13.1) on root.
mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libavformat-dbg
mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libavutil-dbg
mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libfaad-dbg
mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libasound-dbg
mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libavcodec-dbg
mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libswresample-dbg
mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libpostproc-dbg
mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for ncurses-libtinfo-dbg
mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libswscale-dbg
...

So, how should this have worked, or is it a little broken?

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 897 bytes --]

On 12 February 2016 at 11:11, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com> wrote:

> # opkg install mplayer2-dbg
> Installing mplayer2-dbg (2.0+gitr0+2c378c71a4-r13.1) on root.
> mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libavformat-dbg
> mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libavutil-dbg
> mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libfaad-dbg
> mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libasound-dbg
> mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libavcodec-dbg
> mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libswresample-dbg
> mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libpostproc-dbg
> mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for ncurses-libtinfo-dbg
> mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libswscale-dbg
> ...
>
> So, how should this have worked, or is it a little broken?
>

Well it *should* have worked, but clearly isn't!  Can you file a bug?

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1359 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] ffmpeg: Add -dbg packages for all libraries

[Gary Thomas]

On 2016-02-12 12:15, Burton, Ross wrote:
>
> On 12 February 2016 at 11:11, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com <mailto:gary@mlbassoc.com>> wrote:
>
>     # opkg install mplayer2-dbg
>     Installing mplayer2-dbg (2.0+gitr0+2c378c71a4-r13.1) on root.
>     mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libavformat-dbg
>     mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libavutil-dbg
>     mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libfaad-dbg
>     mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libasound-dbg
>     mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libavcodec-dbg
>     mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libswresample-dbg
>     mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libpostproc-dbg
>     mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for ncurses-libtinfo-dbg
>     mplayer2-dbg: unsatisfied recommendation for libswscale-dbg
>     ...
>
>     So, how should this have worked, or is it a little broken?
>
>
> Well it *should* have worked, but clearly isn't!  Can you file a bug?

I already had, albeit with slightly different wording:
   https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9104

I don't have one at hand, but maybe I'll try using different packaging,
e.g. RPM, to see if there is a difference in how this is handled.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------