> Am 11.11.2015 um 18:34 schrieb Khem Raj <[email protected]>: > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Am 11.11.2015 um 04:26 schrieb Khem Raj <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> >>>> On Nov 10, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Since openldap isn't required, but used when found, allow qualified >>>> users to disable the requirement to save some space. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> >>>> --- >>>> meta-oe/recipes-support/libldb/libldb_1.1.17.bb | 5 ++++- >>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-support/libldb/libldb_1.1.17.bb >>>> b/meta-oe/recipes-support/libldb/libldb_1.1.17.bb >>>> index 44f061a..07a839d 100644 >>>> --- a/meta-oe/recipes-support/libldb/libldb_1.1.17.bb >>>> +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-support/libldb/libldb_1.1.17.bb >>>> @@ -4,9 +4,12 @@ SECTION = "libs" >>>> LICENSE = "LGPL-3.0+ & LGPL-2.1+ & GPL-3.0+" >>>> >>>> DEPENDS += "libtdb talloc libtevent popt" >>>> -RDEPENDS_${PN} += "libtevent popt libtalloc openldap" >>>> +RDEPENDS_${PN} += "libtevent popt libtalloc" >>>> RDEPENDS_pyldb += "python libtdb libtalloc" >>>> >>>> +PACKAGECONFIG ??= "ldap" >>>> +PACKAGECONFIG[ldap] = ",,openldap" >>>> + >>>> SRC_URI = "http://samba.org/ftp/ldb/ldb-${PV}.tar.gz \ >>>> file://do-not-import-target-module-while-cross-compile.patch \ >>>> " >>>> -- >>>> 1.9.1 >>>> >>>> This results from analysing why there's still an openldap ... >>>> >>>> I know, having no knob to disable ldap is dirty, but there is no such >>>> switch. >>>> Even more dirty, the switch in samba_4% is for embedded samba3 source-base >>>> only, >>>> the ldb bundled with samba4 just uses ldap when found. >>>> >>>> The patch relies on the idea of qualified users - those who know that they >>>> don't want ldap, disable it everywhere and whistle. >>> >>> it seems to not fix the problem completely, for exact reasons that some >>> other package may bring in openldap and stage it before this recipe is >>> built so you >>> have exact same problem again. I think if this package is patched to add a >>> knob to disable/enable openldap support explicitly then the fix will be >>> complete and I am sure upstream will also accept such a patch. >> >> NO! Please read carefully what "qualified user expected" means! >> > > I understand it well. no we don't want any user tiers here. We should > tend towards becoming user friendly > A qualified user is well equipped to maintain a patch with a > RDEPENDS_${PN}_remove in his layer.
Both aspects have their pros and cons, but ... >> Forcing a dependency because someone else might introduce it either >> is insane - and adding RDEPENDS is just hiding the symptom, not > > its bringing determinism to build thats an important aspect. ... this argument beats them all. Nothing to add ;) Anyway - for determinism, openldap should be in depends then, not RDEPENDS, shouldn't it? >> fixing the root cause. The root cause is, that waf is broken >> by design. > > such sweeping statements have to backed by reasoning otherwise no one > will take them seriously. IMO if you atleast report > this to waf community someone else might be able to help fixing > whatever the problem is. But shouldn't the samba maintainer do that? >> And no, I'm not going to fix waf. > > Thats fine. Cheers -- Jens Rehsack - [email protected] -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
