On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Am 15.12.2015 um 13:50 schrieb Otavio Salvador >> <[email protected]>: >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Am 15.12.2015 um 13:31 schrieb Otavio Salvador >>>> <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Fix bitbake warnings from variable renaming like >>>>> >>>>> Variable key FILES_${PN} (${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* ${libexecdir}/* >>>>> ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} >>>>> ${base_bindir}/* ${base_sbindir}/* ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} >>>>> ${base_prefix}/lib/udev/rules.d ${prefix}/lib/udev/rules.d >>>>> ${datadir}/${BPN} ${libdir}/${BPN}/* ${datadir}/pixmaps >>>>> ${datadir}/applications ${datadir}/idl ${datadir}/omf ${datadir}/sounds >>>>> ${libdir}/bonobo/servers) replaces original key FILES_openjre-8 ( >>>>> ${JRE_HOME}/bin/[a-z]* ${JRE_HOME}/lib/[a-z]* ${JRE_HOME}/LICENSE >>>>> ${JRE_HOME}/release ). >>>>> >>>>> It is caused by using FILES_${PN} and FILES_{JDKPN} or FILES_${JREPN}, >>>>> respectively. Moving FILES_{JDKPN} to openjdk-8_%.bb and FILES_${JREPN} to >>>>> openjre-8_%.bb to allow consequently use FILES_${PN}. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> Looking at the proposed change, it seems it would be better to squash >>>> the JDK and JRE installation to a single recipe and do the proper >>>> split using the packaging. >>>> >>>> Do you think this is reasonable? >>> >>> I split openjdk-8/openjre-8 because of weird behavior wrt. >>> >>> PREFERRED_PROVIDER_java2-runtime = "openjdk-8-jre" >>> >>> but I think with all the things I learned during packaging openjdk-8 >>> and nqp/perl6 I can retry. >>> >>> This will require lots of tests, so unfortunately it's unlikely >>> to manage it this year - maybe even not before our planned HP1 update >>> release. >> >> Right; it is not a problem and I think this could be merged as an >> intermediate solution, in meanwhile. > > Would be great. > >> However I think consolidating it >> into a single recipe would give us some benefits as: faster builds, >> single recipe to manage, removal of .inc file at all. > > Dunno how reasonable it is to install openjre and openjdk on on target, > so I don't see the faster builds. However - for dev or test targets: > *shrug* - I do my best to add no conflicts for most liberal use :) > > Reducing .inc's is your favorite goal, isn't it? :D
When we can consolidate things in a single recipe, most of time, it makes it easier to improve and hack. So it is something we should go after for sure. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
