Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v11] util-linux: split uuid in separate recipe to allow bootstrapping

Peter Kjellerstedt
2021-03-25T14:22:27Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
> Sent: den 25 mars 2021 10:34
> To: Oleksiy Obitotskyi -X (oobitots - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco)
> <oobitots@cisco.com>; Luca Bocassi <luca.boccassi@gmail.com>;
> openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> Cc: bluelightning@bluelightning.org; Peter Kjellerstedt
> <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>; Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v11] util-linux: split uuid in separate
> recipe to allow bootstrapping
>
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 09:17 +0000, Oleksiy Obitotskyi -X (oobitots -
> GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco) wrote:
> > Could you look into this warning.
> >
> > WARNING: util-linux-2.36.2-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: util-linux-dev
> rdepends on util-linux-libuuid-dev, but it isn't a build dependency?
> [build-deps]
> >
> > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/61/builds/3226
>
> That failure was my fault when testing some fixes.
>
> I've sent out a patch which renames util-linux-uuid to util-linux-libuuid
> and sorts out the license issue Peter reported.

I don't mind the recipe being renamed and cleaned up, but I would prefer
to see my entire patch for the license parts being either integrated before
this or squashed into it, whichever you prefer. It does not make sense to
use the same LIC_FILES_CHKSUM for util-linux-libuuid as for util-linux,
and setting the other LICENSE variables in util-linux.inc no longer makes
sense as they are only relevant for util-linux.

> I'm optimistic this fixes the various issues people have been having
> and simplifies the recipe a bit as an added bonus.
>
> The patch has already tested cleanly on the autobuilder (the above warning
> was from an earlier aborted build before I opted to rename the recipe).
>
> Khem: Thanks for the related meta-oe tweak, I think the rename whilst
> slightly painful now is the best way forward overall.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard

//Peter