On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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?
it would translate into a build time dependency > >>> 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? May be/maybe not I dont know, I even dont know whats broken in waf, you did not explain 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 -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
