On Monday, December 12, 2016 11:59:04 AM EST Khem Raj wrote: > > On Dec 12, 2016, at 11:36 AM, Mark Asselstine > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > When building systemd with multilib support enabled in your build you > > will get the following QA warnings (if the 'libdir' QA check is > > enabled.) > > > > WARNING: systemd-1_232-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: systemd-dbg: found \ > > library in wrong location: /lib/systemd/.debug/libsystemd-shared-232.so > > systemd: found library in wrong location: > > /lib/systemd/libsystemd-shared.so > > systemd: found library in wrong location: > > /lib/systemd/libsystemd-shared-232.so [libdir] > Can we check if systemd can be a bit more flexible and accept it to go into > multilib libdir ? this patch can be then applied if its not acceptable to > systemd community.
I think the discussion I pointed to in the commit log closes the door on any such change. Specific the comment from Lennart -- https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/3810#issuecomment-235290526 They don't want the library to be found in the default search path, they want to maintain this as a "hidden, internal resource". Being on the record that I am aware of this discussion/conclusion if I send a patch now I would look like a bit of ass for wasting their time. If someone else wants to push the issue, feel free. Unless there is a suitable recommendation that would satisfy their wishes and ours that I am missing. Mark > > Since systemd 231 upstream has included an 'internal' library which > > they explicitly place in the application specific /lib/systemd > > directory. You can see some of the discussion about this placement > > here https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/3810 > > > > This placement is being picked up by the QA checker since when > > multilibs are enabled it expects all libraries to be in lib32 or > > lib64. Since the systemd and systemd-dbg packages don't contain any > > other libraries we can respect the upstream placement and skip this QA > > check for these packages. Unfortunately the QA mechanism doesn't allow > > us to specify individual files so this approach is the best we can do. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Asselstine <[email protected]> > > --- > > meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_232.bb | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_232.bb > > b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_232.bb index baee02e..c86badb 100644 > > --- a/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_232.bb > > +++ b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_232.bb > > @@ -485,7 +485,8 @@ RRECOMMENDS_${PN} += > > "${@bb.utils.contains('PACKAGECONFIG', 'serial-getty-genera> > > os-release \ > > > > " > > > > -INSANE_SKIP_${PN} += "dev-so" > > +INSANE_SKIP_${PN} += "dev-so libdir" > > +INSANE_SKIP_${PN}-dbg += "libdir" > > INSANE_SKIP_${PN}-doc += " libdir" > > > > PACKAGES =+ "udev udev-hwdb" -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
