Openembedded Devel Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: Any reasons not to use "newer" ppp?
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 17:55:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <iukqla$apc$1@dough.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E0DEA22.1040308@dresearch-fe.de>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Op 01-07-11 17:39, Steffen Sledz schreef:
> On 30.06.2011 12:15, Phil Blundell wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 12:12 +0200, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>> The current oe-dev master contains recipes for 2.4.4 and 2.4.5,
>>> but both are DEFAULT_PREFERENCE = "-1", so 2.4.3 is used by
>>> default.
>>> 
>>> We hit a problem in LCP open/close handling which is fixed in the
>>> newer versions.
>>> 
>>> Is there any reason *not* to go to 2.4.5?
>> 
>> Oe-core is using 2.4.5 and presumably it works OK there.  Judging
>> from the commit messages there is no good reason for 2.4.5 to have
>> been set D_P=-1 in oe.dev, so I think you should be safe to
>> upgrade.
> 
> While making some investingations in this i hit another problem.
> 
> The recipe *ppp_2.4.5.bb* in *oe-core* contains lines like these: 
> ------------------>snip<------------------- FILES_${PN}-dbg +=
> "${libdir}/pppd/2.4.3/.debug" FILES_ppp-oa       =
> "/usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/pppoatm.so" FILES_ppp-oe       =
> "/usr/sbin/pppoe-discovery /usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/rp-pppoe.so" 
> FILES_ppp-radius   = "/usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/radius.so
> /usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/radattr.so /usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/radrealms.so" 
> FILES_ppp-winbind  = "/usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/winbind.so" 
> FILES_ppp-minconn  = "/usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/minconn.so" 
> FILES_ppp-password = "/usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/pass*.so" 
> ------------------>snip<-------------------
> 
> I can't imagine that it is intentionally to have hardcoded pathes
> with *2.4.3* in it here.
> 
> The ppp_2.4.5.bb recipe in oe-dev looks much cleaner. Is there
> someone who feels as a maintainer of ppp and can do some housekeeping
> here?

The OE-core recipe also has a ton of QA errors being reported, so I
wouldn't use that as an example of how to do things.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFODe3qMkyGM64RGpERAj5XAJ9cHJUSIcJ6sS6bqfNYSTYB6/KgSgCeNxZk
i6REs8lKOlBywYBoXpzt+PA=
=5yYU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




      reply	other threads:[~2011-07-01 15:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-30 10:12 Any reasons not to use "newer" ppp? Steffen Sledz
2011-06-30 10:15 ` Phil Blundell
2011-06-30 10:22   ` [PATCH] ppp: 2.4.5 seems to be ready for oe-dev too Steffen Sledz
2011-06-30 17:28     ` Paul Menzel
2011-07-01  6:10       ` Steffen Sledz
2011-07-04  8:31       ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ppp-2.4.5: own package for PPPoL2TP plugin Steffen Sledz
2011-07-04  8:52         ` Paul Menzel
2011-07-04 10:58           ` Steffen Sledz
2011-07-04  8:31       ` [PATCH v2 2/2] ppp-2.4.5: remove `DP = "-1"` Steffen Sledz
2011-07-04  8:54         ` Paul Menzel
2011-07-04  9:09           ` Steffen Sledz
2011-07-04 10:58             ` Steffen Sledz
2011-07-01 15:39   ` Any reasons not to use "newer" ppp? Steffen Sledz
2011-07-01 15:55     ` Koen Kooi [this message]

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='iukqla$apc$1@dough.gmane.org' \
    --to=koen@dominion.thruhere.net \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org \
    /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