Infact it is a direct replacement On Jul 13, 2016 3:32 PM, "Paul Eggleton" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:58:45 Martin Jansa wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 12:30:52PM -0400, Joe MacDonald wrote: > > > The 'virtual' namespace is only intended to be used for build-time > > > dependencies, not in the runtime package namespace. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joe MacDonald <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > > > > meta-oe/recipes-core/plymouth/plymouth_0.9.2.bb | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-core/plymouth/plymouth_0.9.2.bb > > > b/meta-oe/recipes-core/plymouth/plymouth_0.9.2.bb index > de23dcd..597d8cd > > > 100644 > > > --- a/meta-oe/recipes-core/plymouth/plymouth_0.9.2.bb > > > +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-core/plymouth/plymouth_0.9.2.bb > > > @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = > > > "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f"> > > > DEPENDS = "libcap libpng cairo dbus udev" > > > PROVIDES = "virtual/psplash" > > > > > > -RPROVIDES_${PN} = "virtual/psplash virtual/psplash-support" > > > +RPROVIDES_${PN} += "psplash psplash-support" > > > > This causes new NOTE in every build: > > NOTE: multiple providers are available for runtime psplash (psplash, > > plymouth) NOTE: consider defining a PREFERRED_RPROVIDER entry to match > > psplash > > > > Do you want to update > > meta/conf/distro/include/default-providers.inc > > to resolve this first? > > Is this even the right thing to do? Is plymouth a direct drop-in > replacement > for psplash as this implies or (as I suspect) are there subtle differences? > > Cheers, > Paul > > -- > > Paul Eggleton > Intel Open Source Technology Centre > -- > _______________________________________________ > 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
