Patchwork systemd: Cover for udev-systemd

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Khem Raj
Date Aug. 28, 2013, 6:44 a.m.
Message ID <1377672247-16456-1-git-send-email-raj.khem@gmail.com>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/56799/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Khem Raj - Aug. 28, 2013, 6:44 a.m.
meta-systemd currently has a bbappend which provides just a cover
for udev-systemd, if we move this to the recipe proper then the
bbappend can be removed from that layer

Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
---
 meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_206.bb | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Ross Burton - Sept. 3, 2013, 10:20 a.m.
On 28 August 2013 07:44, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
> meta-systemd currently has a bbappend which provides just a cover
> for udev-systemd, if we move this to the recipe proper then the
> bbappend can be removed from that layer

If we do this for systemd we should do it for all recipes that were
part of meta-systemd.  I thought we'd previously agreed that
meta-systemd would contain the "compatibility" provides for people
that had previously used meta-systemd, not oe-core.

Ross
Paul Eggleton - Sept. 3, 2013, 10:25 a.m.
On Tuesday 03 September 2013 11:20:18 Burton, Ross wrote:
> On 28 August 2013 07:44, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
> > meta-systemd currently has a bbappend which provides just a cover
> > for udev-systemd, if we move this to the recipe proper then the
> > bbappend can be removed from that layer
> 
> If we do this for systemd we should do it for all recipes that were
> part of meta-systemd.  I thought we'd previously agreed that
> meta-systemd would contain the "compatibility" provides for people
> that had previously used meta-systemd, not oe-core.

I concur with this. The bbappend should remain in meta-systemd, IMO.

Cheers,
Paul
Khem Raj - Sept. 3, 2013, 4:43 p.m.
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 3:20 AM, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:
> On 28 August 2013 07:44, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
>> meta-systemd currently has a bbappend which provides just a cover
>> for udev-systemd, if we move this to the recipe proper then the
>> bbappend can be removed from that layer
>
> If we do this for systemd we should do it for all recipes that were
> part of meta-systemd.  I thought we'd previously agreed that
> meta-systemd would contain the "compatibility" provides for people
> that had previously used meta-systemd, not oe-core.

yes thats fine.

>
> Ross

Patch

diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_206.bb b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_206.bb
index f05aa1b..4234d13 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_206.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_206.bb
@@ -6,7 +6,10 @@  LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://LICENSE.GPL2;md5=751419260aa954499f7abaabaa882bbe \
                     file://LICENSE.LGPL2.1;md5=4fbd65380cdd255951079008b364516c \
                     file://LICENSE.MIT;md5=544799d0b492f119fa04641d1b8868ed"
 
-PROVIDES = "udev"
+PROVIDES += "udev"
+PROVIDES_udev += "udev-systemd"
+RREPLACES_udev += "udev-systemd"
+RCONFLICTS_udev += "udev-systemd"
 
 PE = "1"