Patchwork [0/1] udev: ship source files to related dbg package

login
register
mail settings
Submitter wenzong.fan@windriver.com
Date Nov. 7, 2013, 11:03 a.m.
Message ID <cover.1383821844.git.wenzong.fan@windriver.com>
Download mbox
Permalink /patch/61237/
State New
Headers show

Pull-request

git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib wenzong/udev-dbg-fix

Comments

wenzong.fan@windriver.com - Nov. 7, 2013, 11:03 a.m.
From: Wenzong Fan <wenzong.fan@windriver.com>

Just ship these sources to their own dbg packages instead of udev-dbg:

    libudev* -> libudev-dbg
    gudev*   -> libgudev-dbg
    others   -> udev-dbg

The following changes since commit d6cc7c8ed76c8b1117cf03c7bd4b0742f98f79b3:

  toolchain-scripts/meta-environment: Further cleanup code duplication (2013-11-06 11:02:27 +0000)

are available in the git repository at:

  git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib wenzong/udev-dbg-fix
  http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=wenzong/udev-dbg-fix

Wenzong Fan (1):
  udev: ship source files to related dbg package

 meta/recipes-core/udev/udev.inc |    7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Ross Burton - Nov. 7, 2013, 11:12 a.m.
On 7 November 2013 11:03,  <wenzong.fan@windriver.com> wrote:
> From: Wenzong Fan <wenzong.fan@windriver.com>
>
> Just ship these sources to their own dbg packages instead of udev-dbg:
>
>     libudev* -> libudev-dbg
>     gudev*   -> libgudev-dbg
>     others   -> udev-dbg

Why do this?  Multiple -dbg packages could make sense in a recipe
which builds a multi-gigabyte -dbg package (such as webkit) but what's
the rationale for doing this in udev?

Ross
wenzong.fan@windriver.com - Nov. 8, 2013, 8:10 a.m.
On 11/07/2013 07:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> On 7 November 2013 11:03,  <wenzong.fan@windriver.com> wrote:
>> From: Wenzong Fan <wenzong.fan@windriver.com>
>>
>> Just ship these sources to their own dbg packages instead of udev-dbg:
>>
>>      libudev* -> libudev-dbg
>>      gudev*   -> libgudev-dbg
>>      others   -> udev-dbg
>
> Why do this?  Multiple -dbg packages could make sense in a recipe
> which builds a multi-gigabyte -dbg package (such as webkit) but what's
> the rationale for doing this in udev?

Actually I don't know clear about why it needs three -dbg packages, 
looks they have been there since very early commits of udev. I suspect 
that udev/libudev/libgudev are independent each other, so they are 
shipped into different packages (base/-dev/-dbg). This patch only ships 
their source code to -dbg packages accordingly.

Thanks
Wenzong

>
> Ross
>
>
Richard Purdie - Nov. 8, 2013, 8:18 a.m.
On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 16:10 +0800, wenzong fan wrote:
> On 11/07/2013 07:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> > On 7 November 2013 11:03,  <wenzong.fan@windriver.com> wrote:
> >> From: Wenzong Fan <wenzong.fan@windriver.com>
> >>
> >> Just ship these sources to their own dbg packages instead of udev-dbg:
> >>
> >>      libudev* -> libudev-dbg
> >>      gudev*   -> libgudev-dbg
> >>      others   -> udev-dbg
> >
> > Why do this?  Multiple -dbg packages could make sense in a recipe
> > which builds a multi-gigabyte -dbg package (such as webkit) but what's
> > the rationale for doing this in udev?
> 
> Actually I don't know clear about why it needs three -dbg packages, 
> looks they have been there since very early commits of udev. I suspect 
> that udev/libudev/libgudev are independent each other, so they are 
> shipped into different packages (base/-dev/-dbg). This patch only ships 
> their source code to -dbg packages accordingly.

We don't support multiple -dbg packages and this looks like an error.

Cheers,

Richard
wenzong.fan@windriver.com - Nov. 8, 2013, 8:26 a.m.
On 11/08/2013 04:18 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 16:10 +0800, wenzong fan wrote:
>> On 11/07/2013 07:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>>> On 7 November 2013 11:03,  <wenzong.fan@windriver.com> wrote:
>>>> From: Wenzong Fan <wenzong.fan@windriver.com>
>>>>
>>>> Just ship these sources to their own dbg packages instead of udev-dbg:
>>>>
>>>>       libudev* -> libudev-dbg
>>>>       gudev*   -> libgudev-dbg
>>>>       others   -> udev-dbg
>>>
>>> Why do this?  Multiple -dbg packages could make sense in a recipe
>>> which builds a multi-gigabyte -dbg package (such as webkit) but what's
>>> the rationale for doing this in udev?
>>
>> Actually I don't know clear about why it needs three -dbg packages,
>> looks they have been there since very early commits of udev. I suspect
>> that udev/libudev/libgudev are independent each other, so they are
>> shipped into different packages (base/-dev/-dbg). This patch only ships
>> their source code to -dbg packages accordingly.
>
> We don't support multiple -dbg packages and this looks like an error.

What about the -dev packages?

So the correct fix is removing below configs, at least -dbg configs, right?

+ FILES_libudev = "${base_libdir}/libudev.so.*"
+ FILES_libudev-dbg = "${base_libdir}/.debug/libudev.so.*"
+ FILES_libudev-dev = "${includedir}/libudev.h ${libdir}/libudev.so 
${libdir}/libudev.la \
                      ${libdir}/libudev.a ${libdir}/pkgconfig/libudev.pc"

+ FILES_libgudev = "${base_libdir}/libgudev*.so.* ${libdir}/libgudev*.so.*"
+ FILES_libgudev-dbg = "${base_libdir}/.debug/libgudev*.so.* 
${libdir}/.debug/libgudev*.so.*"
+ FILES_libgudev-dev = "${includedir}/gudev* ${libdir}/libgudev*.so 
${libdir}/libgudev*.la \
                      ${libdir}/libgudev*.a ${libdir}/pkgconfig/gudev*.pc"


Thanks
Wenzong

>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
>
wenzong.fan@windriver.com - Nov. 11, 2013, 10:13 a.m.
On 11/08/2013 04:18 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 16:10 +0800, wenzong fan wrote:
>> On 11/07/2013 07:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>>> On 7 November 2013 11:03,  <wenzong.fan@windriver.com> wrote:
>>>> From: Wenzong Fan <wenzong.fan@windriver.com>
>>>>
>>>> Just ship these sources to their own dbg packages instead of udev-dbg:
>>>>
>>>>       libudev* -> libudev-dbg
>>>>       gudev*   -> libgudev-dbg
>>>>       others   -> udev-dbg
>>>
>>> Why do this?  Multiple -dbg packages could make sense in a recipe
>>> which builds a multi-gigabyte -dbg package (such as webkit) but what's
>>> the rationale for doing this in udev?
>>
>> Actually I don't know clear about why it needs three -dbg packages,
>> looks they have been there since very early commits of udev. I suspect
>> that udev/libudev/libgudev are independent each other, so they are
>> shipped into different packages (base/-dev/-dbg). This patch only ships
>> their source code to -dbg packages accordingly.
>
> We don't support multiple -dbg packages and this looks like an error.

Ok, another patch for removing the extra -dbg packages has been sent 
with subject:

     udev: remove libudev-dbg and libgudev-dbg

Thanks
Wenzong

>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
>