zeroconf: remove
PATCH 1/1 zeroconf: remove
We already have avahi in OE-Core and some cursory research suggests that avahi is preferred over this package, which has apparently not seen a release since 2006. Nothing in OE-Core actually refers to it, so let's just remove it.
--- .../zeroconf/zeroconf/compilefix.patch | 19 -------- .../zeroconf/zeroconf/debian-zeroconf | 51 -------------------- .../zeroconf/zeroconf/zeroconf-default | 17 ------- meta/recipes-connectivity/zeroconf/zeroconf_0.9.bb | 34 ------------- 4 files changed, 121 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-connectivity/zeroconf/zeroconf/compilefix.patch delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-connectivity/zeroconf/zeroconf/debian-zeroconf delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-connectivity/zeroconf/zeroconf/zeroconf-default delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-connectivity/zeroconf/zeroconf_0.9.bb
meta/recipes-connectivity/zeroconf/zeroconf/compilefix.patch deleted +0 -19
@@ -1,19 +0,0 @@ -| zeroconf.c: In function 'main': -| zeroconf.c:145: error: 'PATH_MAX' undeclared (first use in this function) - -RP - 4/9/09 - -Upstream-Status: Pending - -Index: zeroconf-0.9/zeroconf.c -=================================================================== ---- zeroconf-0.9.orig/zeroconf.c 2009-09-04 10:05:25.000000000 +0100 -+++ zeroconf-0.9/zeroconf.c 2009-09-04 10:05:42.000000000 +0100 -@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ - #include <net/if_arp.h> - #include <sys/time.h> - #include <signal.h> -+#include <limits.h> - - #include "delay.h" -
meta/recipes-connectivity/zeroconf/zeroconf/debian-zeroconf deleted +0 -51
51 lines not on this page · raw message
meta/recipes-connectivity/zeroconf/zeroconf/zeroconf-default deleted +0 -17
@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@ -# Default for zeroconf - -# disable zeroconf -# If you want to disable zeroconf completely, uncomment the following line -# this may be useful if you are debugging zeroconf or starting it manually -#DISABLE=yes - -# black-listed interfaces -# Interfaces which you never wish to have zeroconf run on should -# be listed here. e.g. "eth2 wlan1" in a space seperated string -IFBLACKLIST="" - -# fallback only -# If you would only like a link-local address if you were unable to -# obtain an address via DHCP then uncomment the following line -#FALLBACK=yes -
meta/recipes-connectivity/zeroconf/zeroconf_0.9.bb deleted +0 -34
@@ -1,34 +0,0 @@ -SUMMARY = "IPv4 link-local address allocator" -DESCRIPTION = "Zeroconf is a program that is used to claim IPv4 \ -link-local addresses. IPv4 link-local addresses are useful when setting \ -up ad-hoc networking between devices without the involvement of a either \ -a DHCP server or network administrator. \ -These addresses are allocated from the 169.254.0.0/16 address range and \ -are normally attached to each Ethernet device in your computer. \ -Addresses are assigned randomly by each host and, in case of collision, \ -both hosts (are supposed to) renumber." -AUTHOR = "Anand Kumria <[email protected]>" -HOMEPAGE = "http://www.progsoc.org/~wildfire/zeroconf/" -LICENSE = "GPLv2+" -LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=4325afd396febcb659c36b49533135d4 \ - file://zeroconf.c;beginline=1;endline=13;md5=a5bada96e1e34b08eb7446b28e2630b2" -SECTION = "net" - -PR = "r1" - -SRC_URI = "http://www.progsoc.org/~wildfire/zeroconf/download/${BPN}-${PV}.tar.gz \ - file://compilefix.patch \ - file://zeroconf-default \ - file://debian-zeroconf" - -SRC_URI[md5sum] = "bdafb16b008ebb5633e4e581f77821d2" -SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "a8c74df127753e2310fa1e072f3c9ca44a404bb0bbce9cfec7a84c6dff8bec7b" - -do_install () { - install -d ${D}${sbindir} - install -d ${D}${sysconfdir}/network/if-up.d - install -d ${D}${sysconfdir}/default - install -c -m 755 ${S}/zeroconf ${D}${sbindir}/zeroconf - install -c -m 755 ${WORKDIR}/debian-zeroconf ${D}${sysconfdir}/network/if-up.d/zeroconf - install -c ${WORKDIR}/zeroconf-default ${D}${sysconfdir}/default/zeroconf -}
Signature · 1 line
1.7.9.5
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
Quoted 4 lines · On Wednesday 22 August 2012 16:50:27 Paul Eggleton wrote:
We already have avahi in OE-Core and some cursory research suggests that avahi is preferred over this package, which has apparently not seen a release since 2006. Nothing in OE-Core actually refers to it, so let's just remove it.
Hmm, this was meant to be an RFC - I would like to give people some time to respond.
Cheers,
Paul
Signature · 2 lines
Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
Op 22 aug. 2012, om 18:11 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 8 lines · On Wednesday 22 August 2012 16:50:27 Paul Eggleton wrote:
Quoted 4 lines
We already have avahi in OE-Core and some cursory research suggests that avahi is preferred over this package, which has apparently not seen a release since 2006. Nothing in OE-Core actually refers to it, so let's just remove it.
Hmm, this was meant to be an RFC - I would like to give people some time to respond.
IIRC gumstix used it for bonjour without bringing in the megabytes of support needed for avahi.
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
Quoted 8 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 22 aug. 2012, om 18:11 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 6 lines · On Wednesday 22 August 2012 16:50:27 Paul Eggleton wrote:
Quoted 4 lines
We already have avahi in OE-Core and some cursory research suggests that avahi is preferred over this package, which has apparently not seen a release since 2006. Nothing in OE-Core actually refers to it, so let's just remove it.
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Hmm, this was meant to be an RFC - I would like to give people some time to respond.
IIRC gumstix used it for bonjour without bringing in the megabytes of support needed for avahi.
I'm not sure that is enough to warrant it staying in OE-Core. meta-oe might be a better fit? Can avahi be cut down for "tiny" usage though configuration?
Cheers,
Richard
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
Quoted 3 lines
I'm not sure that is enough to warrant it staying in OE-Core. meta-oe might be a better fit? Can avahi be cut down for "tiny" usage though configuration?
Agreed.
I don't think Avahi can be cut down enough, zerconf only supports exposing the machine name which is a pretty tiny subset of mDNS in total.
ross
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
Quoted 9 lines · Ross
Quoted 3 lines
I'm not sure that is enough to warrant it staying in OE-Core. meta-oe might be a better fit? Can avahi be cut down for "tiny" usage though configuration?
Agreed.
I don't think Avahi can be cut down enough, zerconf only supports exposing the machine name which is a pretty tiny subset of mDNS in total.
So, where does that leave us with this patch then?
Cheers,
Paul
Signature · 2 lines
Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
Quoted 1 line · Paul Eggleton
So, where does that leave us with this patch then?
I'd say merge it, if anyone really needs a tiny mDNS responder they can dig it out.
Ross
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
Op 3 sep. 2012, om 15:53 heeft "Burton, Ross" <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 5 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 1 line
So, where does that leave us with this patch then?
I'd say merge it, if anyone really needs a tiny mDNS responder they can dig it out.
And put it in meta-networking instead of oe-core :)
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
Quoted 1 line · Koen Kooi
And put it in meta-networking instead of oe-core :)
Yay another dumping around! It's so nice having multiple dumping grounds to pick from.
Ross
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
Quoted 5 lines · Ross
Quoted 1 line · Koen Kooi
And put it in meta-networking instead of oe-core :)
Yay another dumping around! It's so nice having multiple dumping grounds to pick from.
Well, to be fair the intent is that meta-networking should be fairly well- organised. The only issue with this specific recipe is that the upstream is unmaintained.
Cheers,
Paul
Signature · 2 lines
Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
In reply to Koen KooiQuoted 2 lines · On Wednesday 22 August 2012 18:32:46 Koen Kooi wrote:
IIRC gumstix used it for bonjour without bringing in the megabytes of support needed for avahi.
FWIW, meta-gumstix of today has no reference to it; but on the other hand it is a BSP layer with no tasks or recipes.
Cheers,
Paul
Signature · 2 lines
Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre
Re: [PATCH] zeroconf: remove - RFC
In reply to Paul EggletonQuoted 8 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 4 lines · On Wednesday 22 August 2012 16:50:27 Paul Eggleton wrote:
We already have avahi in OE-Core and some cursory research suggests that avahi is preferred over this package, which has apparently not seen a release since 2006. Nothing in OE-Core actually refers to it, so let's just remove it.
Hmm, this was meant to be an RFC - I would like to give people some time to respond.
Not seeing a release since 2006 is good enough reason to remove something which is handling data directly from the network...
Ross