From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.dream-property.net (mail.dream-property.net [82.149.226.172]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8587077F34 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:43:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.dream-property.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE41F31A6D64; Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:43:04 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.dream-property.net Received: from mail.dream-property.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.dream-property.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id OaRySiGY5vcy; Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:43:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from t460p (p57A61C94.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.166.28.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.dream-property.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E230B31A6D5E; Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:43:01 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:43:00 +0100 From: Andreas Oberritter To: "Zheng, Ruoqin" Message-ID: <20171207194300.6ceeaadd@t460p> In-Reply-To: <33D4DBCAC5F2D74E96B07F6E7632BF732EEA567B@G08CNEXMBPEKD01.g08.fujitsu.local> References: <1512466387-8999-1-git-send-email-zhengrq.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <20171205142903.6443ab7e@t460p> <33D4DBCAC5F2D74E96B07F6E7632BF732EEA53C1@G08CNEXMBPEKD01.g08.fujitsu.local> <20171206121342.647dd19e@t460p> <33D4DBCAC5F2D74E96B07F6E7632BF732EEA567B@G08CNEXMBPEKD01.g08.fujitsu.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] [meta-networking][PATCH] packagegroup-samba: new add X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2017 18:43:04 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:20:58 +0000 "Zheng, Ruoqin" wrote: > Hi Andreas=EF=BC=81 > Thank you for your description. > And what about samba-server? It's called "samba". If it's confusing, maybe adding a comment inside the r= ecipe or to the package summary of "samba" might help. Regards, Andreas >=20 > -------------------------------------------------- > Zheng Ruoqin > Nanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech. Co., Ltd.(FNST) > ADDR.: No.6 Wenzhu Road, Software Avenue, > Nanjing, 210012, China > MAIL : zhengrq.fnst@cn.fujistu.com >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Andreas Oberritter [mailto:obi@opendreambox.org]=20 > Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 7:14 PM > To: Zheng, Ruoqin/=E9=83=91 =E8=8B=A5=E9=92=A6 > Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCH] [meta-networking][PATCH] packagegroup-samba: ne= w add >=20 > Hi Zheng, >=20 > On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 03:30:32 +0000 > "Zheng, Ruoqin" wrote: >=20 > > Hi Andreas=EF=BC=81 > > I have some questions here: > >=20 > > 1. Why don't you just create a samba-client meta package inside the = samba recipe instead? > > Well, I don't know how to create a samba-client meta package, and= could you help me? =20 >=20 > do it the same way you did here, but put it into samba_*.bb, i.e. add ${P= N}-client to PACKAGES and create RDEPENDS_${PN}-client. >=20 > You may need to add ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}-client =3D "1", because the package= won't contain any files. >=20 > Don't forget to remove samba-common. >=20 > >=20 > > 2. All samba libraries already depend on samba-common, so samba depe= nds on it indirectly. Therefore this "package group" doesn't seem to be nec= essary. > > Yes, I found it, thank you. > > =20 > > > + > > > +SUMMARY_${PN}-ctdb-tests =3D " samba ctdb-tests" > > > +RDEPENDS_${PN}-ctdb-tests =3D "samba-ctdb-tests" > > > + > > > +SUMMARY_${PN}-pidl =3D "samba-pidl" > > > +RDEPENDS_${PN}-pidl =3D "samba-pidl" =20 > >=20 > > 3. These two seem to be unnecessary, too. > > Testsuite for samba is unnecessary for the packagegroup, why? > > And can you give me a advice about how to deal with samba-pidl?Pu= t it into client? =20 >=20 > Put it nowhere. Installing packagegroup-samba-pidl is in no way easier th= an installing samba-pidl directly. The summary doesn't add any value either. >=20 > The same holds true for samba-ctdb-tests. >=20 > Generally, package groups are meta packages that combine many packages fr= om different recipes. They don't make sense if they install only one packag= e, and they aren't necessary if all used packages come from exactly one rec= ipe. >=20 > Regards, > Andreas >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Zheng Ruoqin > > Nanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech. Co., Ltd.(FNST) > > ADDR.: No.6 Wenzhu Road, Software Avenue, > > Nanjing, 210012, China > > MAIL : zhengrq.fnst@cn.fujistu.com > >=20 > >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: openembedded-devel-bounces@lists.openembedded.org=20 > > [mailto:openembedded-devel-bounces@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf=20 > > Of Andreas Oberritter > > Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 9:29 PM > > To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > > Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCH] [meta-networking][PATCH] packagegroup-samba:= =20 > > new add > >=20 > > Hi Zheng, > >=20 > > On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 17:33:07 +0800 > > zhengrq wrote: > > =20 > > > Add packagegroup for samba, for there are too many rpms in samba and = it's hard to manage. > > >=20 > > > Signed-off-by: Zheng Ruoqin > > > --- > > > .../packagegroups/packagegroup-samba.bb | 28 ++++++++++++= ++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 > > > meta-networking/recipes-connectivity/packagegroups/packagegroup-samba. > > > bb > > >=20 > > > diff --git > > > a/meta-networking/recipes-connectivity/packagegroups/packagegroup-sa > > > mb > > > a.bb > > > b/meta-networking/recipes-connectivity/packagegroups/packagegroup-sa > > > mb > > > a.bb > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..6177691 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/meta-networking/recipes-connectivity/packagegroups/packagegrou > > > +++ p- > > > +++ samba.bb > > > @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ > > > +SUMMARY =3D "samba package groups" > > > +PV =3D "1.0" > > > +PR =3D "r2" > > > + > > > +inherit packagegroup > > > + > > > +PROVIDES =3D "${PACKAGES}" > > > +PACKAGES =3D "${PN}-server ${PN}-client ${PN}-ctdb-tests ${PN}-pidl" > > > + > > > +SUMMARY_${PN}-client =3D " samba client" > > > +RDEPENDS_${PN}-client =3D "\ > > > + smbclient \ > > > + samba-common \ > > > + winbind \ > > > + registry-tools \ > > > + " =20 > >=20 > > Why don't you just create a samba-client meta package inside the samba = recipe instead? > > =20 > > > + > > > +SUMMARY_${PN}-server =3D " samba server" > > > +RDEPENDS_${PN}-server =3D "\ > > > + samba \ > > > + samba-common \ > > > + " =20 > >=20 > > All samba libraries already depend on samba-common, so samba depends on= it indirectly. Therefore this "package group" doesn't seem to be necessary. > > =20 > > > + > > > +SUMMARY_${PN}-ctdb-tests =3D " samba ctdb-tests" > > > +RDEPENDS_${PN}-ctdb-tests =3D "samba-ctdb-tests" > > > + > > > +SUMMARY_${PN}-pidl =3D "samba-pidl" > > > +RDEPENDS_${PN}-pidl =3D "samba-pidl" =20 > >=20 > > These two seem to be unnecessary, too. > >=20 > > Regards, > > Andreas > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > > Openembedded-devel mailing list > > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > =20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20