| Submitter | Marko Kati? |
|---|---|
| Date | Nov. 16, 2012, 8:11 p.m. |
| Message ID | <1353096699-19130-1-git-send-email-dromede@gmail.com> |
| Download | mbox | patch |
| Permalink | /patch/39185/ |
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Comments
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 09:11:39PM +0100, dromede@gmail.com wrote: > From: Marko Katic <dromede.gmail.com> > > udev provides a udev-utils package that once provided utility binaries > such as udevadm, udevtest and udevinfo. udevtest and udevinfo are > deprecated and their functions are now handled by udevadm. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597539 > > remove udevinfo and udevtest from the udev-utils package. Are they still built? If yes then there should be warning about unpackaged files (you would need to delete them in do_install) or they are picked by some other package (PN probably). Cheers, > > Signed-off-by: Marko Katic <dromede.gmail.com> > --- > meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc b/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc > index 4705b9b..7133cc4 100644 > --- a/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc > +++ b/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc > @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ FILES_udev-cache = "${sysconfdir}/init.d/udev-cache ${sysconfdir}/default/udev-c > > FILES_udev-acl = "${base_libdir}/udev/udev-acl ${base_libdir}/udev/rules.d/70-acl.rules" > > -FILES_udev-utils = "${bindir}/udevinfo ${bindir}/udevtest ${base_sbindir}/udevadm" > +FILES_udev-utils = "${bindir}/udevadm" > > RDEPENDS_udev-consolekit += "udev-acl" > FILES_udev-consolekit = "${libdir}/ConsoleKit" > -- > 1.7.9.5 > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:48:41PM +0100, Marko Kati? wrote: > Udevtest and udevinfo are not being built because they no longer exist in > udev 182 sources. Ah, so this change is only cosmetic and does not change package output (otherwise missing PR bump). Cheers, > On Nov 16, 2012 10:36 PM, "Martin Jansa" <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 09:11:39PM +0100, dromede@gmail.com wrote: > > > From: Marko Katic <dromede.gmail.com> > > > > > > udev provides a udev-utils package that once provided utility binaries > > > such as udevadm, udevtest and udevinfo. udevtest and udevinfo are > > > deprecated and their functions are now handled by udevadm. > > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597539 > > > > > > remove udevinfo and udevtest from the udev-utils package. > > > > Are they still built? If yes then there should be warning about > > unpackaged files (you would need to delete them in do_install) or they > > are picked by some other package (PN probably). > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marko Katic <dromede.gmail.com> > > > --- > > > meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc > b/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc > > > index 4705b9b..7133cc4 100644 > > > --- a/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc > > > +++ b/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc > > > @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ FILES_udev-cache = "${sysconfdir}/init.d/udev-cache > ${sysconfdir}/default/udev-c > > > > > > FILES_udev-acl = "${base_libdir}/udev/udev-acl > ${base_libdir}/udev/rules.d/70-acl.rules" > > > > > > -FILES_udev-utils = "${bindir}/udevinfo ${bindir}/udevtest > ${base_sbindir}/udevadm" > > > +FILES_udev-utils = "${bindir}/udevadm" > > > > > > RDEPENDS_udev-consolekit += "udev-acl" > > > FILES_udev-consolekit = "${libdir}/ConsoleKit" > > > -- > > > 1.7.9.5 > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Openembedded-core mailing list > > > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > > > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > > > > -- > > Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>wrote: > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:48:41PM +0100, Marko Kati? wrote: > > Udevtest and udevinfo are not being built because they no longer exist in > > udev 182 sources. > > Ah, so this change is only cosmetic and does not change package output > (otherwise missing PR bump). > Changing udev.inc like this when you're specifically addressing one version is cause for concern. Exactly which udev version deprecated the utilities? oe-core might not have many udev versions around, but other layers still do, for machines running older kernels.
i definitely should have written a much more elaborate commit message, sorry about that. The patch is definitely not cosmetic. This patch also deals with the changed installation path of udevadm. Older versions of udev installed udevadm in /sbin. Recent versions of udev install udevadm into /usr/bin. This means that the udev-utils package will be empty because: a) udevinfo and udevtest no longer exist b) udevadm is no longer installed in base_sbindir, so it will end up in the main udev package. Therefore, udev-utils package will not be made at all. This breaks do_rootfs stage since udev.inc RRECOMMENDS udev-utils. Also, the initscript that comes with udev 182 calls udevadm via it's absolute path - /usr/bin/udevadm. Initscripts in older versions of udev expect udevadm in /sbin/. I don't know exactly which version of udev deprecated udevinfo and udevtest. There is no mention of it in udev 182 changelog and i couldn't find a git commit that made this change. The entire udev 182 source tree only mentions udevinfo and udevtest in the changelog and the NEWS file. Chris, you raise a valid point concerning older udev versions. If the general concensus is that udev.inc in OE-Core should support older and newer versions of udev, then my patch is clearly not a proper solution. A proper solution might be to: a) Leave udevtest and udevinfo in udev-utils to properly support older versions of udev that have these packages. b) Move udevadm into the main udev package. This makes a lot of sense since udevadm is crucial for proper udev operation. c) Remove udev-utils from RRECOMMENDS. Or we could just add ALLOW_EMPTY to udev.inc. A messy but simple solution.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:11 PM, <dromede@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Marko Katic <dromede.gmail.com> > > udev provides a udev-utils package that once provided utility binaries > such as udevadm, udevtest and udevinfo. udevtest and udevinfo are > deprecated and their functions are now handled by udevadm. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597539 > > remove udevinfo and udevtest from the udev-utils package. > > Signed-off-by: Marko Katic <dromede.gmail.com> > Please rm them in do_install_append so if they ever are not build anymore we'll get a build-error and can handle it.
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Marko Kati? <dromede@gmail.com> wrote: > A proper solution might be to: > > a) Leave udevtest and udevinfo in udev-utils to properly support older > versions of udev that have these packages. > b) Move udevadm into the main udev package. This makes a lot of sense > since udevadm is crucial for proper udev operation. > c) Remove udev-utils from RRECOMMENDS. > This sounds like a clean, solid route to me. Hopefully someone else will chime in with input on it as well.
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Marko Kati? <dromede@gmail.com> wrote: > >> A proper solution might be to: >> >> a) Leave udevtest and udevinfo in udev-utils to properly support older >> versions of udev that have these packages. >> b) Move udevadm into the main udev package. This makes a lot of sense >> since udevadm is crucial for proper udev operation. >> c) Remove udev-utils from RRECOMMENDS. >> > > This sounds like a clean, solid route to me. Hopefully someone else will > chime in with input on it as well. > I see no value in having the others and deprecated tools available. Having udevadm available in udev-utils allows for it use with mdev for trigger the events in kernel, for example. I like to have this possibility.
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote: > > > On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Marko Kati? <dromede@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> A proper solution might be to: >>> >>> a) Leave udevtest and udevinfo in udev-utils to properly support older >>> versions of udev that have these packages. >>> b) Move udevadm into the main udev package. This makes a lot of sense >>> since udevadm is crucial for proper udev operation. >>> c) Remove udev-utils from RRECOMMENDS. >> >> >> This sounds like a clean, solid route to me. Hopefully someone else will >> chime in with input on it as well. > > > I see no value in having the others and deprecated tools available. Having > udevadm available in udev-utils allows for it use with mdev for trigger the > events in kernel, for example. I like to have this possibility. > > -- > Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems > E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br > Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br > Ok, so udevadm should stay in udev-utils. In that case i propose we: a) Add ${bindir}/udevadm and ${base_sbindir}/udevadm to FILES_udev-utils. This should ensure that udevadm will always go in udev-utils regardless of the udev version being built. This should also ensure that udev-utils package will always be made. b) Make udevadm available in both ${bindir} and ${base_sbindir} via symlinks installed in do_install_append. This should ensure proper support for all versions of udev.
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Marko Kati? <dromede@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Otavio Salvador > <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Marko Kati? <dromede@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> A proper solution might be to: >>>> >>>> a) Leave udevtest and udevinfo in udev-utils to properly support older >>>> versions of udev that have these packages. >>>> b) Move udevadm into the main udev package. This makes a lot of sense >>>> since udevadm is crucial for proper udev operation. >>>> c) Remove udev-utils from RRECOMMENDS. >>> >>> >>> This sounds like a clean, solid route to me. Hopefully someone else will >>> chime in with input on it as well. >> >> >> I see no value in having the others and deprecated tools available. Having >> udevadm available in udev-utils allows for it use with mdev for trigger the >> events in kernel, for example. I like to have this possibility. >> >> -- >> Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems >> E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br >> Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br >> > > Ok, so udevadm should stay in udev-utils. In that case i propose we: > > a) Add ${bindir}/udevadm and ${base_sbindir}/udevadm to > FILES_udev-utils. This should > ensure that udevadm will always go in udev-utils regardless of the > udev version being built. > This should also ensure that udev-utils package will always be made. > > b) Make udevadm available in both ${bindir} and ${base_sbindir} via > symlinks installed in > do_install_append. This should ensure proper support for all versions of udev. I like your plan. +1
Patch
diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc b/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc index 4705b9b..7133cc4 100644 --- a/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc +++ b/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ FILES_udev-cache = "${sysconfdir}/init.d/udev-cache ${sysconfdir}/default/udev-c FILES_udev-acl = "${base_libdir}/udev/udev-acl ${base_libdir}/udev/rules.d/70-acl.rules" -FILES_udev-utils = "${bindir}/udevinfo ${bindir}/udevtest ${base_sbindir}/udevadm" +FILES_udev-utils = "${bindir}/udevadm" RDEPENDS_udev-consolekit += "udev-acl" FILES_udev-consolekit = "${libdir}/ConsoleKit"