On Thursday 09 February 2012 13:41:53 Andreas Oberritter wrote: > On 09.02.2012 01:54, Andreas Oberritter wrote: > > On 08.02.2012 20:48, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 17:35, Andreas Oberritter <[email protected]>wrote: > >>> I already explained in the commit message, why a PR bump is not needed. > >>> Can you please explain which other possible failures you're expecting, > >>> so I can learn why my reasoning may be wrong? > >>> > >>> This patch only fixes an unavailable build dependency at bitbake level, > >>> nothing more. > >> > >> Can the user call: > >> > >> bitbake libsm > >> > >> and then build giflib? in case of positive, we need to enforce have or > >> not > >> it linked. > > > > At the time I created the patch, the user couldn't run bitbake libsm > > (for the same reason that it wouldn't be built automatically through > > giflib's DEPENDS). > > > > That said, I updated the repos after your mail and ran bitbake libsm in > > order to get the error message again, but the error vanished. > > Apparently, an indirect dependency on libx11 was dropped during the last > > few weeks. I searched the logs, but didn't find the change. Strange. > > Now, many x11 packages got built even though x11 still wasn't listed in > > my DISTRO_FEATURES. > > > > Anyway, please consider this patch obsolete. I'll probably resend an > > updated version together with other patches to disable some more x11 > > libraries on demand. > > I did some further research regarding giflib: > > - giflib doesn't depend on libSM alone, but optionally depends on > libX11. When linked against libX11, it also links agains libSM and > libICE, under certain conditions. Since libSM does not depend on > libX11, the current giflib build is non-deterministic. > > - Debian's/Ubuntu's giflib gets configured with --disable-x11 > unconditionally. > > So we have two options: > > 1.) Pass --disable-x11 unconditionally like Debian/Ubuntu > 2.) Add virtual/libx11 to DEPENDS, if x11 is defined in > DISTRO_FEATURES, and add --enable/diable-x11 to EXTRA_OECONF > > Because the current recipe didn't depend on libX11 and no one > complained about it, I question the usefulness of linking giflib > against x11. Therefore I vote for option 1 (see patch below). > > What does giflib do if linked against libX11? > - It builds a tool called gif2x11 > - DumpScreen2Gif() gains support for dumping X11 windows
I'd agree with disabling it as well. According to google it was Henning who added libsm as a dependency in OE-Classic. Henning, do you remember the reason for adding this, and is it still valid? Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
