Op 18 aug. 2014, om 17:35 heeft Richard Purdie <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
> On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 15:39 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: >> On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 15:14 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: >>> Well then maybe that allarch package with perl dependency shouldn't be >>> marked as allarch. >> >> Take a step back and think about this from the end user system >> perspective. The packages are all identical for each architecture, >> "perl" doesn't change name. >> >> To me that means the correct end result is such a package should be >> "allarch" in the package feeds. >> >> The question then becomes, how do we generate such things in a sane way. >> >>> I'm in favor of removing default allarch and setting correct >>> PACKAGE_ARCH manually in the packagegroup recipes like we do elsewhere. >>> >>> packagegroups are small and "rebuilt" quickly, so I don't mind >>> "building" them once per TUNE_PKGARCH or even once per MACHINE_ARCH like >>> we do for couple of them already. >>> >>> I can even find few changes from me on ML which do exactly that. >> >> It does seem a bit of a cop out to do this on the grounds that its >> small/fast :/. >> >> I agree there is good reason why some should be PKGARCH but we can >> probably do better than just marking them all that way IMO. I think we >> should try and mark them correctly too, i.e. think about whether the >> packages really are identical and/or make sense as allarch and try and >> avoid duplication if so. > > I also have one other idea. We could adjust debian.bbclass so that it > adds an RPROVIDES for the original package name. We could then instruct > packagegroups specifically not to adjust the naming for debian renaming. > > This would mean that the packagegroups would know the dependencies by > their non-debian, unversioned name. > > Would that work for people? > > I'm torn on the idea right now but thought I'd share it. What happens in the following situation: foo.bb generates foo.ipk (/usr/bin/foo) and libfoo5.ipk (/usr/lib/libfoo.so.5), will libfoo5 RPROVIDE 'foo', 'libfoo' or something else? regards, Koen -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
