lsbinitscripts: support multilib, link function and add the header for patch
cover lsbinitscripts: support multilib, link function and add the header for patch
From: Xiaofeng Yan <[email protected]>
Add the multilib support for this package and remove the original /etc/init.d/functions and link functions to functions.lsbinitscripts. Add the header for patch.
The following changes since commit 3f292735407e50eebb23044fa9f579906a94e800:
gcc-configure-target: Fix sysroot option breakage I introduced (sorry) (2012-06-14 19:48:47 +0100)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib xiaofeng/lsbinitscripts
http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=xiaofeng/lsbinitscripts
Xiaofeng Yan (3):
multilib.conf: Add the support of multilib for lsbinitscripts
lsbinitscripts: Remove original /etc/init.d/functions when building
an lsb image
lsbinitscripts: Add the header for functions.patch
meta/conf/multilib.conf | 1 + .../lsb/lsbinitscripts/functions.patch | 3 +++ meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb | 8 +++++++- 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Signature · 1 line
1.7.9.5
PATCH 1/3 multilib.conf: Add the support of multilib for lsbinitscripts
From: Xiaofeng Yan <[email protected]>
Add the multilib support for this package to multilib.conf because error will appear when building an lib32-core-image-lsb without this patch.
[YOCTO #2571]
--- meta/conf/multilib.conf | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
meta/conf/multilib.conf +1 -0
@@ -420,6 +420,7 @@ BBCLASSEXTEND_append_pn-lrzsz = " ${MULTILIBS}" BBCLASSEXTEND_append_pn-lsb = " ${MULTILIBS}" BBCLASSEXTEND_append_pn-lsbsetup = " ${MULTILIBS}" BBCLASSEXTEND_append_pn-lsbtest = " ${MULTILIBS}" +BBCLASSEXTEND_append_pn-lsbinitscripts = " ${MULTILIBS}" BBCLASSEXTEND_append_pn-lsof = " ${MULTILIBS}" BBCLASSEXTEND_append_pn-ltp = " ${MULTILIBS}" BBCLASSEXTEND_append_pn-lttng-control = " ${MULTILIBS}"
Signature · 1 line
1.7.9.5
PATCH 2/3 lsbinitscripts: Remove original /etc/init.d/functions when building an lsb image
In reply to [email protected]From: Xiaofeng Yan <[email protected]>
The linking will fail when an original functions exist. So remove the original functions when building an lsb image and make functions linking to functions.lsbinitscripts successfully.
[YOCTO #2133]
--- meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +7 -1
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = "SysV init scripts which only is used in an LSB image" SECTION = "base" LICENSE = "GPLv2" DEPENDS = "popt" -PR = "r0" +PR = "r1" LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=ebf4e8b49780ab187d51bd26aaa022c6"
@@ -25,3 +25,9 @@ do_install(){ install -d ${D}/etc/init.d/ install -m 0755 ${S}/rc.d/init.d/functions ${D}/etc/init.d/functions } + +pkg_postinst_${PN} () { + if [ -f "/etc/init.d/functions" ]; then + rm -f /etc/init.d/functions + fi +}
Signature · 1 line
1.7.9.5
Re: [PATCH 2/3] lsbinitscripts: Remove original /etc/init.d/functions when building an lsb image
Quoted 27 lines · On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 17:30 +0800, [email protected] wrote:
From: Xiaofeng Yan <[email protected]>
The linking will fail when an original functions exist. So remove the original functions when building an lsb image and make functions linking to functions.lsbinitscripts successfully.
[YOCTO #2133]
Signed-off-by Xiaofeng Yan <[email protected]>--- meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +1
-1@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = "SysV init scripts which only is used in an LSB image" SECTION = "base" LICENSE = "GPLv2" DEPENDS = "popt" -PR = "r0" +PR = "r1" LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=ebf4e8b49780ab187d51bd26aaa022c6"
meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb do_install(){ · line 33
Quoted 9 lines
meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +6
-0@@ -25,3 +25,9 @@ do_install(){ install -d ${D}/etc/init.d/ install -m 0755 ${S}/rc.d/init.d/functions ${D}/etc/init.d/functions } + +pkg_postinst_${PN} () { + if [ -f "/etc/init.d/functions" ]; then + rm -f /etc/init.d/functions + fi +}
This looks highly suspicious to me. Shouldn't the other provider of this be put under control for update-alternatives too or something?
Cheers,
Richard
Re: [PATCH 2/3] lsbinitscripts: Remove original /etc/init.d/functions when building an lsb image
Quoted 27 lines · Richard Purdie
Quoted 26 lines · On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 17:30 +0800, [email protected] wrote:
From: Xiaofeng Yan<[email protected]>
The linking will fail when an original functions exist. So remove the original functions when building an lsb image and make functions linking to functions.lsbinitscripts successfully.
[YOCTO #2133]
Signed-off-by Xiaofeng Yan<[email protected]>--- meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +1
-1@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = "SysV init scripts which only is used in an LSB image" SECTION = "base" LICENSE = "GPLv2" DEPENDS = "popt" -PR = "r0" +PR = "r1" LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=ebf4e8b49780ab187d51bd26aaa022c6"
Quoted 12 lines
meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb do_install(){ · line 33
Quoted 10 lines
meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +6
-0@@ -25,3 +25,9 @@ do_install(){ install -d ${D}/etc/init.d/ install -m 0755 ${S}/rc.d/init.d/functions ${D}/etc/init.d/functions } + +pkg_postinst_${PN} () { + if [ -f "/etc/init.d/functions" ]; then + rm -f /etc/init.d/functions + fi +}This looks highly suspicious to me. Shouldn't the other provider of this be put under control for update-alternatives too or something?
Thanks for your comments.
the other provider of this is from initscripts_1.0.bb, installing all of init-scripts in the stage of installing without using update-alternatives. So the functions is a file instead of linking mode. An error appear when lsbinicscritps replace initscripts if not removing file functions. So I remove the original functions for making the latter linking successfully. What is the purpose is for avoiding to modify the other non-lsb bb files. The changes of this will be only in lsb image. Thanks
Yan
Quoted 10 lines
Cheers,
Richard
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [PATCH 2/3] lsbinitscripts: Remove original /etc/init.d/functions when building an lsb image
Quoted 43 lines · Xiaofeng Yan
Quoted 29 lines · Richard Purdie
Quoted 28 lines · On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 17:30 +0800, [email protected] wrote:
From: Xiaofeng Yan<[email protected]>
The linking will fail when an original functions exist. So remove the original functions when building an lsb image and make functions linking to functions.lsbinitscripts successfully.
[YOCTO #2133]
Signed-off-by Xiaofeng Yan<[email protected]>--- meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +0
-0@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = "SysV init scripts which only is usedin an LSB image"
SECTION = "base"
LICENSE = "GPLv2"
DEPENDS = "popt"meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +1
-1-PR = "r0" +PR = "r1" LIC_FILES_CHKSUM ="file://COPYING;md5=ebf4e8b49780ab187d51bd26aaa022c6"
Quoted 13 lines
meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb do_install(){ · line 33
Quoted 11 lines
meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +0
-0@@ -25,3 +25,9 @@ do_install(){ install -d ${D}/etc/init.d/ install -m 0755 ${S}/rc.d/init.d/functions${D}/etc/init.d/functions
}meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +6
-0+ +pkg_postinst_${PN} () { + if [ -f "/etc/init.d/functions" ]; then + rm -f /etc/init.d/functions + fi +}This looks highly suspicious to me. Shouldn't the other provider of this be put under control for update-alternatives too or something?
Quoted 2 lines
Thanks for your comments.
the other provider of this is from initscripts_1.0.bb, installing all of init-scripts in the stage of installing without using update-alternatives. So the functions is a file instead of linking mode. An error appear when lsbinicscritps replace initscripts if not removing file functions. So I remove the original functions for making the latter linking successfully. What is the purpose is for avoiding to modify the other non-lsb bb files. The changes of this will be only in lsb image.
Can we add the removing function if not a linking when using update-alternatives ?
Quoted 18 lines
Thanks
YanQuoted 10 lines
Cheers,
Richard
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [PATCH 2/3] lsbinitscripts: Remove original /etc/init.d/functions when building an lsb image
In reply to Xiaofeng YanQuoted 40 lines · Xiaofeng Yan
Quoted 27 lines · Richard Purdie
Quoted 26 lines · On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 17:30 +0800, [email protected] wrote:
From: Xiaofeng Yan<[email protected]>
The linking will fail when an original functions exist. So remove the original functions when building an lsb image and make functions linking to functions.lsbinitscripts successfully.
[YOCTO #2133]
Signed-off-by Xiaofeng Yan<[email protected]>--- meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +1
-1@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ DESCRIPTION = "SysV init scripts which only is used in an LSB image" SECTION = "base" LICENSE = "GPLv2" DEPENDS = "popt" -PR = "r0" +PR = "r1" LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=ebf4e8b49780ab187d51bd26aaa022c6"Quoted 12 lines
meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb do_install(){ · line 33
Quoted 10 lines
meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts_9.03.bb +6
-0@@ -25,3 +25,9 @@ do_install(){ install -d ${D}/etc/init.d/ install -m 0755 ${S}/rc.d/init.d/functions ${D}/etc/init.d/functions } + +pkg_postinst_${PN} () { + if [ -f "/etc/init.d/functions" ]; then + rm -f /etc/init.d/functions + fi +}This looks highly suspicious to me. Shouldn't the other provider of this be put under control for update-alternatives too or something?
Quoted 8 lines
Thanks for your comments.
the other provider of this is from initscripts_1.0.bb, installing all of init-scripts in the stage of installing without using update-alternatives. So the functions is a file instead of linking mode. An error appear when lsbinicscritps replace initscripts if not removing file functions. So I remove the original functions for making the latter linking successfully. What is the purpose is for avoiding to modify the other non-lsb bb files. The changes of this will be only in lsb image.
Right, I understand there is a conflict here. Could we not add update-alternatives support to the initscripts recipe for this file to, so its a link in both packages and then update-alternatives will take care of linking the correct one into place?
Cheers,
Richard
PATCH 3/3 lsbinitscripts: Add the header for functions.patch
In reply to [email protected]From: Xiaofeng Yan <[email protected]>
Add upstream-status and signed-off-by to functions.patch
--- .../lsb/lsbinitscripts/functions.patch | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
meta/recipes-extended/lsb/lsbinitscripts/functions.patch +3 -0
@@ -1,3 +1,6 @@ +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [configuration] + +Signed-off-by: Xiaofeng Yan <[email protected]> --- a/rc.d/init.d/functions 2009-12-10 05:24:11.000000000 +0800 +++ b/rc.d/init.d/functions.new 2012-06-01 16:57:12.651229387 +0800 @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
Signature · 1 line
1.7.9.5