On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 5:33 AM, Burton, Ross <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 29 January 2016 at 21:21, Burton, Ross <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> And for even more fun the resulting package doesn't actually depend on >> libssl, due to the layout confusing the shlibs code in package.bbclass. > > > Sigh. Clearly I need a break. Inserted a load of debugging and then the > obvious jumped out at me. > > Using oe-pkg-data to see what files are in what packages: > > apr-util: > /usr/lib/libaprutil-1.so.0 > /usr/lib/libaprutil-1.so.0.5.4 > ... > apr-util-dev: > ... > /usr/lib/apr-util-1/apr_crypto_openssl-1.so > /usr/lib/apr-util-1/apr_crypto_openssl.so > /usr/lib/apr-util-1/apr_dbm_gdbm-1.so > /usr/lib/apr-util-1/apr_dbm_gdbm.so > > Those .so files are not development links, but library modules. They should > be packaged into FILES_$PN, and no mention of apr-util-1 in FILES_PN-dev.
I wonder if we should have a QA check to decipher that if .so is a not a symlink then provide this as an error right away until the recipe takes care of it with FILES_SOLIBS or something like that > > Ross > > -- > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
