> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Paul Barker > Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 7:49 PM > To: Huang, Jie (Jackie) > Cc: Martin Jansa ([email protected]); > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [oe] [meta-oe][PATCH] vim: add recipe for vim-tiny > > On 16 October 2014 04:27, Huang, Jie (Jackie) <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] > >> [mailto:openembedded-devel- [email protected]] On Behalf > >> Of Paul Barker > >> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 1:45 AM > >> To: OE Devel > >> Subject: Re: [oe] [meta-oe][PATCH] vim: add recipe for vim-tiny > >> > >> On 15 October 2014 11:38, Martin Jansa <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 05:53:31AM -0400, [email protected] > >> > wrote: > >> >> From: Jackie Huang <[email protected]> > >> >> > >> >> Changes: > >> >> - split the vim recipe to two files > >> >> - add bb for vim-tiny based on PACKAGECONFIG defined in .inc file > >> >> - use trim_version to get VIMDIR > >> > > >> > If you really want to revert following 2 patches, then you need to > > > > Sorry that I didn't notice the 2 patches in the commit history. > > > >> > provide more justifications for your patch and also confirm that > >> > the recipes don't stage conflicting files in sysroot anymore (I > >> > don't see any change in recipe preventing that). > > > > In vim-tiny, there are only two files installed: the binary and the rc > > file, and they are renamed to avoid the confliction: > > $ find . -type f > > ./bin/vim-tiny (it's vim in vim package) ./usr/share/vim/virc (it's > > vimrc in vim package) > > > > With just vim-tiny installed, the user should still be able to run 'vim' to > start the program. We could > make that an update-alternatives link, but then we'd have to rename the > executable for vim proper > and use update-alternatives there as well. > > I'd rather see both packages use the 'vim' executable name and set > CONFLICTS/RCONFLICTS
Yeah, it would be better to do like this, I will change it. > appropriately, unless there is a good reason a user would want both 'vim' and > 'vim-tiny' installed > together. > > >> > > >> > >> Agreed. There may be a use for having both vim and vim-tiny in a > >> package feed, but I think we need a > > > > We have been using like this for a long time and it works fine when both > > vim and vim-tiny are > installed. > > > >> better way of handling it than this. > > > > I don't insist on this way and will be happy if there is a better way > > to handle this. We usually define what need to be installed in > > different packagegroups and images, for smaller image, we need > > vim-tiny, some others need vim, I know we can change PACKAGECONFIG to > > get different vims, but it doesn't work in packagegroup or image. And > > it seems more clear to user/customer if we use name like vim-tiny, > > gvim/vim-gui, or user may > complain that vim is not fully featured when they see vim is installed but > actually it is the one with tiny > feature. > > I think this is a wider issue that may affect packages other than vim. > I seem to recall the question of whether PACKAGECONFIG values can be set per > image recipe being > asked previously. > > Is it possible to write a vim-tiny recipe without splitting vim.inc from > vim_*.bb? Can vim-tiny just > 'require vim_7.4.373.bb' and change PACKAGECONFIG and the do_install function? I had thought about this, but never try. I just checked that there are some evidence that "require bb" should work, so it's possible and I think it would be a better way to handle this. I will re-work on it and send v2, thanks! Thanks, Jackie > > > > >> > >> This patch is difficult to fully review as it mixes conceptually > >> different changes together. If this or something similar does go in after > >> further discussion, it needs > to be split up. > > > > Yeah, sorry for that, I will split it up if needed after further discussion > > here. > > > > Thanks, > > Jackie > > > > Cheers, > > -- > Paul Barker > > Email: [email protected] > http://www.paulbarker.me.uk -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
