libbonobo.inc: add libbonobo-bin package

PATCH In review Hongxu Jia 3 participants 12 messages Nov 12, 2014 – Nov 19, 2014

lore

Share & tools

lore

Hongxu Jia

author

2014-11-12 02:13 UTC #0 lore raw

v2 cover libbonobo.inc: add libbonobo-bin package

Changed in V2:
As Paul suggested, we should use lib_package class to handle this

//Hongxu

The following changes since commit c78eca1ea7452a62f86b740ec59f1cd39e399d73:

postfix: create or update aliases.db when using systemd (2014-11-10 15:18:55 -0500)

are available in the git repository at:

git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib hongxu/fix-meta-oe
http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=hongxu/fix-meta-oe

Hongxu Jia (1):
libbonobo.inc: add libbonobo-bin package

 meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Signature · 1 line

1.9.1

Hongxu Jia

author

2014-11-12 02:13 UTC #1 lore raw

PATCH v2 1/1 libbonobo.inc: add libbonobo-bin package

The previous libbonobo package contains perl scripts, while installing libbonobo, package management detected perl required, but it actually not needed as lib. So add libbonobo-bin package to contain these scripts. It refers debian:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/libbonobo2-bin

Signed-off-by Hongxu Jia <[email protected]>

---
 meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc +2 -1

index 8b6007e..e0f6168 100644
@@ -5,10 +5,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f \
 SECTION = "x11/gnome/libs"
 DEPENDS = "glib-2.0 orbit2 intltool-native libxml2 dbus dbus-glib"
 
-inherit gnomebase gtk-doc
+inherit gnomebase gtk-doc lib_package
 
 ORBIT_IDL_SRC = "${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/orbit-idl-2"
 
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-bin = "${PN} perl"
 FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/orbit-2.0/*.so ${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/*.so"
 FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/.debug \
     ${libdir}/bonobo-2.0/samples/.debug ${libdir}/orbit-2.0/.debug"

Signature · 1 line

1.9.1

Koen Kooi

2014-11-13 11:02 UTC #2 lore raw

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hongxu Jia schreef op 12-11-14 03:13:

Quoted 17 lines

The previous libbonobo package contains perl scripts, while installing libbonobo, package management detected perl required, but it actually not needed as lib. So add libbonobo-bin package to contain these scripts. It refers debian: https://packages.debian.org/sid/libbonobo2-bin
Signed-off-by Hongxu Jia <[email protected]> ---
meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc index 8b6007e..e0f6168 100644 --- a/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc +++ b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc @@ -5,10 +5,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f \ SECTION = "x11/gnome/libs" DEPENDS = "glib-2.0 orbit2 intltool-native libxml2 dbus dbus-glib"

Quoted 9 lines

-inherit gnomebase gtk-doc +inherit gnomebase gtk-doc lib_package
ORBIT_IDL_SRC = "${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/orbit-idl-2"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-bin = "${PN} perl" FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/orbit-2.0/*.so ${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/*.so" FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/.debug \
${libdir}/bonobo-2.0/samples/.debug ${libdir}/orbit-2.0/.debug"

This breaks the upgrade path
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iD8DBQFUZI/LMkyGM64RGpERAtVEAJ0XmKfZNy6DSxfpmN1DLPGrSf381ACgmPOz D6JMY11ejawTrkxO3ZcoBOw=
=xLd+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Hongxu Jia

author

2014-11-13 11:42 UTC #3 lore raw

Quoted 23 lines · Koen Kooi

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hongxu Jia schreef op 12-11-14 03:13:
Quoted 19 lines
The previous libbonobo package contains perl scripts, while installing libbonobo, package management detected perl required, but it actually not needed as lib. So add libbonobo-bin package to contain these scripts. It refers debian: https://packages.debian.org/sid/libbonobo2-bin
Signed-off-by Hongxu Jia <[email protected]> ---
meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc index 8b6007e..e0f6168 100644 --- a/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc +++ b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc @@ -5,10 +5,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f \ SECTION = "x11/gnome/libs" DEPENDS = "glib-2.0 orbit2 intltool-native libxml2 dbus dbus-glib"
-inherit gnomebase gtk-doc +inherit gnomebase gtk-doc lib_package

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 7 lines
ORBIT_IDL_SRC = "${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/orbit-idl-2"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-bin = "${PN} perl" FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/orbit-2.0/*.so ${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/*.so" FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/.debug \
${libdir}/bonobo-2.0/samples/.debug ${libdir}/orbit-2.0/.debug"
This breaks the upgrade path

I am sorry I do not understand what you mean,
do you mean running 'smart upgrade' failed?

The reason why split ${PN}-bin is it contain perl script.

//Hongxu

Quoted 9 lines

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iD8DBQFUZI/LMkyGM64RGpERAtVEAJ0XmKfZNy6DSxfpmN1DLPGrSf381ACgmPOz D6JMY11ejawTrkxO3ZcoBOw=
=xLd+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Koen Kooi

2014-11-18 12:48 UTC #4 lore raw

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hongxu Jia schreef op 13-11-14 12:42:

Quoted 24 lines

On 11/13/2014 07:02 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Hongxu Jia schreef op 12-11-14 03:13:
Quoted 22 lines
Quoted 22 lines
Quoted 22 lines
The previous libbonobo package contains perl scripts, while installing libbonobo, package management detected perl required, but it actually not needed as lib. So add libbonobo-bin package to contain these scripts. It refers debian:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/libbonobo2-bin
Signed-off-by Hongxu Jia <[email protected]> ---
meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc index 8b6007e..e0f6168 100644 --- a/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc +++ b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc @@ -5,10 +5,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f \ SECTION = "x11/gnome/libs" DEPENDS = "glib-2.0 orbit2 intltool-native libxml2 dbus dbus-glib"
-inherit gnomebase gtk-doc +inherit gnomebase gtk-doc lib_package

Quoted 11 lines

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
ORBIT_IDL_SRC = "${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/orbit-idl-2"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-bin = "${PN} perl" FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/orbit-2.0/*.so ${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/*.so" FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/.debug \
${libdir}/bonobo-2.0/samples/.debug ${libdir}/orbit-2.0/.debug"
This breaks the upgrade path
Quoted 2 lines
I am sorry I do not understand what you mean, do you mean running 'smart upgrade' failed?

You are moving files between packages, which makes 'opkg update ; opkg upgrade' fail with conflicts unless you carefully craft RREPLACES/RCONFLICTS or enforce ordering in upgrade order (which isn't currently possible). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iD8DBQFUa0APMkyGM64RGpERAh7AAJ9n0hIeX6jEo9x0C0H75SGUMShn2wCghoNe sA1dMU2SBVy+tsLnEq+Qkks=
=2G5X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Paul Eggleton

2014-11-18 15:27 UTC #5 lore raw

Hi Koen,

Quoted 35 lines · On Tuesday 18 November 2014 13:48:15 Koen Kooi wrote:

Hongxu Jia schreef op 13-11-14 12:42:
Quoted 34 lines
On 11/13/2014 07:02 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Hongxu Jia schreef op 12-11-14
03:13:
Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines
The previous libbonobo package contains perl scripts, while installing libbonobo, package management detected perl required, but it actually not needed as lib. So add libbonobo-bin package to contain these scripts. It refers debian:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/libbonobo2-bin
Signed-off-by Hongxu Jia <[email protected]> ---
meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc index 8b6007e..e0f6168 100644 --- a/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc +++ b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc @@ -5,10 +5,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f \ SECTION = "x11/gnome/libs" DEPENDS = "glib-2.0 orbit2 intltool-native libxml2 dbus dbus-glib"
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
-inherit gnomebase gtk-doc +inherit gnomebase gtk-doc lib_package
ORBIT_IDL_SRC = "${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/orbit-idl-2"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-bin = "${PN} perl" FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/orbit-2.0/*.so ${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/*.so" FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/.debug \
${libdir}/bonobo-2.0/samples/.debug ${libdir}/orbit-2.0/.debug"
This breaks the upgrade path

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I am sorry I do not understand what you mean, do you mean running 'smart upgrade' failed?
You are moving files between packages, which makes 'opkg update ; opkg upgrade' fail with conflicts unless you carefully craft RREPLACES/RCONFLICTS or enforce ordering in upgrade order (which isn't currently possible).

So what would you suggest - never make any packaging changes? It's not as if this is the first time we've done this kind of thing...

Cheers,
Paul

Signature · 2 lines

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Koen Kooi

2014-11-18 18:32 UTC #6 lore raw

Quoted 41 lines

Op 18 nov. 2014, om 16:27 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Hi Koen,
Quoted 35 lines · On Tuesday 18 November 2014 13:48:15 Koen Kooi wrote:
Hongxu Jia schreef op 13-11-14 12:42:
Quoted 34 lines
On 11/13/2014 07:02 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Hongxu Jia schreef op 12-11-14
03:13:
Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines
The previous libbonobo package contains perl scripts, while installing libbonobo, package management detected perl required, but it actually not needed as lib. So add libbonobo-bin package to contain these scripts. It refers debian:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/libbonobo2-bin
Signed-off-by Hongxu Jia <[email protected]> ---
meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc index 8b6007e..e0f6168 100644 --- a/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc +++ b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc @@ -5,10 +5,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f \ SECTION = "x11/gnome/libs" DEPENDS = "glib-2.0 orbit2 intltool-native libxml2 dbus dbus-glib"
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
-inherit gnomebase gtk-doc +inherit gnomebase gtk-doc lib_package
ORBIT_IDL_SRC = "${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/orbit-idl-2"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-bin = "${PN} perl" FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/orbit-2.0/*.so ${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/*.so" FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/.debug \
${libdir}/bonobo-2.0/samples/.debug ${libdir}/orbit-2.0/.debug"
This breaks the upgrade path

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I am sorry I do not understand what you mean, do you mean running 'smart upgrade' failed?
You are moving files between packages, which makes 'opkg update ; opkg upgrade' fail with conflicts unless you carefully craft RREPLACES/RCONFLICTS or enforce ordering in upgrade order (which isn't currently possible).
So what would you suggest - never make any packaging changes?

No. I suggest thinking about what you're doing and minimizing the damage. So far the patches I've seen are misguided (recipe==package assumption) or plain weird. And in all cases break upgrade paths. Since arguing the use case seems to fall on deaf ears I can only argue the technical problems with them.

Quoted 2 lines

It's not as if
this is the first time we've done this kind of thing...

And people still sound surprised when I say upgrade paths are broken between releases. You yourself told me I should speak up when seeing such patches and so I did.

Paul Eggleton

2014-11-19 00:36 UTC #7 lore raw

Quoted 48 lines · On Tuesday 18 November 2014 19:32:19 Koen Kooi wrote:

Quoted 48 lines
Op 18 nov. 2014, om 16:27 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Hi Koen,
Quoted 42 lines · On Tuesday 18 November 2014 13:48:15 Koen Kooi wrote:
Hongxu Jia schreef op 13-11-14 12:42:
Quoted 25 lines
On 11/13/2014 07:02 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Hongxu Jia schreef op 12-11-14
03:13:
Quoted 22 lines
Quoted 22 lines
Quoted 22 lines
The previous libbonobo package contains perl scripts, while installing libbonobo, package management detected perl required, but it actually not needed as lib. So add libbonobo-bin package to contain these scripts. It refers debian:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/libbonobo2-bin
Signed-off-by Hongxu Jia <[email protected]> ---
meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc index 8b6007e..e0f6168 100644 --- a/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc +++ b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc @@ -5,10 +5,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f \ SECTION = "x11/gnome/libs" DEPENDS = "glib-2.0 orbit2 intltool-native libxml2 dbus dbus-glib"
-inherit gnomebase gtk-doc +inherit gnomebase gtk-doc lib_package
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
ORBIT_IDL_SRC = "${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/orbit-idl-2"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-bin = "${PN} perl" FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/orbit-2.0/*.so ${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/*.so" FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/.debug \
${libdir}/bonobo-2.0/samples/.debug ${libdir}/orbit-2.0/.debug"
This breaks the upgrade path
Quoted 2 lines
I am sorry I do not understand what you mean, do you mean running 'smart upgrade' failed?
You are moving files between packages, which makes 'opkg update ; opkg upgrade' fail with conflicts unless you carefully craft RREPLACES/RCONFLICTS or enforce ordering in upgrade order (which isn't currently possible).>

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 1 line
So what would you suggest - never make any packaging changes?
No. I suggest thinking about what you're doing and minimizing the damage. So far the patches I've seen are misguided (recipe==package assumption) or plain weird. And in all cases break upgrade paths. Since arguing the use case seems to fall on deaf ears I can only argue the technical problems with them.

What do you mean by "arguing the use case" ?

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 1 line
It's not as if this is the first time we've done this kind of thing...
And people still sound surprised when I say upgrade paths are broken between releases. You yourself told me I should speak up when seeing such patches and so I did.

I did yes, and I hadn't forgotten. However we do need to make packaging changes from time to time, so we need to work out how to do them properly - and I'll bang the same drum as I always do - if we want to ensure these changes are properly considered and done in the correct manner, we need to have those things documented. If we do not, you shouldn't be surprised when people miss things. This is clearly an area you are interested in so it's an area you could help document.

Getting back to this specific problem, when splitting out a set of files into a different package as is being done by this patch, as far as I am aware there is no means to ensure that the new package gets installed on upgrade without introducing a hard dependency which would defeat the purpose of making the change. So that means you either make the change or you don't. Are any of these files that are being split out actually of interest on a typical system that OE would build for? If not, do we care that those files will disappear?

Cheers,
Paul

Signature · 2 lines

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Koen Kooi

2014-11-19 07:53 UTC #8 lore raw

Quoted 54 lines

Op 19 nov. 2014, om 01:36 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 50 lines · On Tuesday 18 November 2014 19:32:19 Koen Kooi wrote:
Quoted 49 lines
Op 18 nov. 2014, om 16:27 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Hi Koen,
Quoted 35 lines · On Tuesday 18 November 2014 13:48:15 Koen Kooi wrote:
Hongxu Jia schreef op 13-11-14 12:42:
Quoted 34 lines
On 11/13/2014 07:02 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Hongxu Jia schreef op 12-11-14
03:13:
Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines
The previous libbonobo package contains perl scripts, while installing libbonobo, package management detected perl required, but it actually not needed as lib. So add libbonobo-bin package to contain these scripts. It refers debian:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/libbonobo2-bin
Signed-off-by Hongxu Jia <[email protected]> ---
meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc index 8b6007e..e0f6168 100644 --- a/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc +++ b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc @@ -5,10 +5,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f \ SECTION = "x11/gnome/libs" DEPENDS = "glib-2.0 orbit2 intltool-native libxml2 dbus dbus-glib"
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
-inherit gnomebase gtk-doc +inherit gnomebase gtk-doc lib_package
ORBIT_IDL_SRC = "${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/orbit-idl-2"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-bin = "${PN} perl" FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/orbit-2.0/*.so ${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/*.so" FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/.debug \
${libdir}/bonobo-2.0/samples/.debug ${libdir}/orbit-2.0/.debug"
This breaks the upgrade path
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I am sorry I do not understand what you mean, do you mean running 'smart upgrade' failed?
You are moving files between packages, which makes 'opkg update ; opkg upgrade' fail with conflicts unless you carefully craft RREPLACES/RCONFLICTS or enforce ordering in upgrade order (which isn't currently possible).>
So what would you suggest - never make any packaging changes?

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines
No. I suggest thinking about what you're doing and minimizing the damage. So far the patches I've seen are misguided (recipe==package assumption) or plain weird. And in all cases break upgrade paths. Since arguing the use case seems to fall on deaf ears I can only argue the technical problems with them.
What do you mean by "arguing the use case" ?

Making recipe name and package name match, see the avahi patch for OE-core

Quoted 15 lines

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
It's not as if this is the first time we've done this kind of thing...
And people still sound surprised when I say upgrade paths are broken between releases. You yourself told me I should speak up when seeing such patches and so I did.
I did yes, and I hadn't forgotten. However we do need to make packaging changes from time to time, so we need to work out how to do them properly - and I'll bang the same drum as I always do - if we want to ensure these changes are properly considered and done in the correct manner, we need to have those things documented. If we do not, you shouldn't be surprised when people miss things. This is clearly an area you are interested in so it's an area you could help document.

Quoted 5 lines

Getting back to this specific problem, when splitting out a set of files into a different package as is being done by this patch, as far as I am aware there is no means to ensure that the new package gets installed on upgrade without introducing a hard dependency which would defeat the purpose of making the change. So that means you either make the change or you don't.

Not quite, but let's assume so for this case.

Quoted 3 lines

Are any of
these files that are being split out actually of interest on a typical system that OE would build for? If not, do we care that those files will disappear?

If the package were the file gets moved to is not installed by default this change will cause no problems, but for all others (e.g. people with -dev and/or -dbg installed) it will.

Paul Eggleton

2014-11-19 11:17 UTC #9 lore raw

Quoted 61 lines · On Wednesday 19 November 2014 08:53:11 Koen Kooi wrote:

Quoted 61 lines
Op 19 nov. 2014, om 01:36 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:>
Quoted 57 lines · On Tuesday 18 November 2014 19:32:19 Koen Kooi wrote:
Quoted 45 lines
Op 18 nov. 2014, om 16:27 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Hi Koen,
Quoted 39 lines · On Tuesday 18 November 2014 13:48:15 Koen Kooi wrote:
Hongxu Jia schreef op 13-11-14 12:42:
Quoted 37 lines
On 11/13/2014 07:02 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Hongxu Jia schreef op 12-11-14
03:13:
Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines
The previous libbonobo package contains perl scripts, while installing libbonobo, package management detected perl required, but it actually not needed as lib. So add libbonobo-bin package to contain these scripts. It refers debian:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/libbonobo2-bin
Signed-off-by Hongxu Jia <[email protected]> ---
meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc index 8b6007e..e0f6168 100644 --- a/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc +++ b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc @@ -5,10 +5,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f \ SECTION = "x11/gnome/libs" DEPENDS = "glib-2.0 orbit2 intltool-native libxml2 dbus dbus-glib"
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
-inherit gnomebase gtk-doc +inherit gnomebase gtk-doc lib_package
ORBIT_IDL_SRC = "${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/orbit-idl-2"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-bin = "${PN} perl" FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/orbit-2.0/*.so ${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/*.so" FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/.debug \
${libdir}/bonobo-2.0/samples/.debug ${libdir}/orbit-2.0/.debug"
This breaks the upgrade path
Quoted 2 lines
I am sorry I do not understand what you mean, do you mean running 'smart upgrade' failed?
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
You are moving files between packages, which makes 'opkg update ; opkg upgrade' fail with conflicts unless you carefully craft RREPLACES/RCONFLICTS or enforce ordering in upgrade order (which isn't currently possible).>
So what would you suggest - never make any packaging changes?
No. I suggest thinking about what you're doing and minimizing the damage. So far the patches I've seen are misguided (recipe==package assumption) or plain weird. And in all cases break upgrade paths. Since arguing the use case seems to fall on deaf ears I can only argue the technical problems with them.

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 1 line
What do you mean by "arguing the use case" ?
Making recipe name and package name match, see the avahi patch for OE-core

Ah, except not only did those patches not get merged, the submitter even asked for the patches to be dropped after the discussion. That hardly counts as "falling on deaf ears".

Quoted 15 lines

Quoted 15 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
It's not as if this is the first time we've done this kind of thing...
And people still sound surprised when I say upgrade paths are broken between releases. You yourself told me I should speak up when seeing such patches and so I did.
I did yes, and I hadn't forgotten. However we do need to make packaging changes from time to time, so we need to work out how to do them properly -
and I'll bang the same drum as I always do - if we want to ensure these changes are properly considered and done in the correct manner, we need to have those things documented. If we do not, you shouldn't be surprised when people miss things. This is clearly an area you are interested in so it's an area you could help document.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 6 lines
Getting back to this specific problem, when splitting out a set of files into a different package as is being done by this patch, as far as I am aware there is no means to ensure that the new package gets installed on upgrade without introducing a hard dependency which would defeat the purpose of making the change. So that means you either make the change or you don't.
Not quite, but let's assume so for this case.

Well if that's not accurate then let's be clear - why not ... ?

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines
Are any of
these files that are being split out actually of interest on a typical system that OE would build for? If not, do we care that those files will disappear?
If the package were the file gets moved to is not installed by default this change will cause no problems, but for all others (e.g. people with -dev and/or -dbg installed) it will.

I'm not following. Won't the corresponding -dev/-dbg packages be updated at the same time?

Cheers,
Paul

Signature · 2 lines

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Koen Kooi

2014-11-19 14:11 UTC #10 lore raw

Quoted 65 lines

Op 19 nov. 2014, om 12:17 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 61 lines · On Wednesday 19 November 2014 08:53:11 Koen Kooi wrote:
Quoted 61 lines
Op 19 nov. 2014, om 01:36 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:>
Quoted 57 lines · On Tuesday 18 November 2014 19:32:19 Koen Kooi wrote:
Quoted 45 lines
Op 18 nov. 2014, om 16:27 heeft Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Hi Koen,
Quoted 39 lines · On Tuesday 18 November 2014 13:48:15 Koen Kooi wrote:
Hongxu Jia schreef op 13-11-14 12:42:
Quoted 37 lines
On 11/13/2014 07:02 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Hongxu Jia schreef op 12-11-14
03:13:
Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines
The previous libbonobo package contains perl scripts, while installing libbonobo, package management detected perl required, but it actually not needed as lib. So add libbonobo-bin package to contain these scripts. It refers debian:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/libbonobo2-bin
Signed-off-by Hongxu Jia <[email protected]> ---
meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc index 8b6007e..e0f6168 100644 --- a/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc +++ b/meta-gnome/recipes-gnome/bonobo/libbonobo.inc @@ -5,10 +5,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=94d55d512a9ba36caa9b7df079bae19f \ SECTION = "x11/gnome/libs" DEPENDS = "glib-2.0 orbit2 intltool-native libxml2 dbus dbus-glib"
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
-inherit gnomebase gtk-doc +inherit gnomebase gtk-doc lib_package
ORBIT_IDL_SRC = "${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/orbit-idl-2"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-bin = "${PN} perl" FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/orbit-2.0/*.so ${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/*.so" FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/bonobo/monikers/.debug \
${libdir}/bonobo-2.0/samples/.debug ${libdir}/orbit-2.0/.debug"
This breaks the upgrade path
Quoted 2 lines
I am sorry I do not understand what you mean, do you mean running 'smart upgrade' failed?
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
You are moving files between packages, which makes 'opkg update ; opkg upgrade' fail with conflicts unless you carefully craft RREPLACES/RCONFLICTS or enforce ordering in upgrade order (which isn't currently possible).>
So what would you suggest - never make any packaging changes?
No. I suggest thinking about what you're doing and minimizing the damage. So far the patches I've seen are misguided (recipe==package assumption) or plain weird. And in all cases break upgrade paths. Since arguing the use case seems to fall on deaf ears I can only argue the technical problems with them.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
What do you mean by "arguing the use case" ?
Making recipe name and package name match, see the avahi patch for OE-core
Ah, except not only did those patches not get merged, the submitter even asked for the patches to be dropped after the discussion. That hardly counts as "falling on deaf ears".

Great, I can never be sure if the lack of comments from the powers that be mean approval or dismissal.Apart from Martin no one commented on the recipe==package assumptionm which usually means the patch will get merged.

Quoted 23 lines

Quoted 23 lines
Quoted 22 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
It's not as if this is the first time we've done this kind of thing...
And people still sound surprised when I say upgrade paths are broken between releases. You yourself told me I should speak up when seeing such patches and so I did.
I did yes, and I hadn't forgotten. However we do need to make packaging changes from time to time, so we need to work out how to do them properly -
and I'll bang the same drum as I always do - if we want to ensure these changes are properly considered and done in the correct manner, we need to have those things documented. If we do not, you shouldn't be surprised when people miss things. This is clearly an area you are interested in so it's an area you could help document.
Getting back to this specific problem, when splitting out a set of files into a different package as is being done by this patch, as far as I am aware there is no means to ensure that the new package gets installed on upgrade without introducing a hard dependency which would defeat the purpose of making the change. So that means you either make the change or you don't.

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 1 line
Not quite, but let's assume so for this case.
Well if that's not accurate then let's be clear - why not ... ?

"either you make the change or you don't" is creating something like a false dilemma. For the rest of your analysis, see below.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Are any of
these files that are being split out actually of interest on a typical system that OE would build for? If not, do we care that those files will disappear?

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 3 lines
If the package were the file gets moved to is not installed by default this change will cause no problems, but for all others (e.g. people with -dev and/or -dbg installed) it will.
I'm not following. Won't the corresponding -dev/-dbg packages be updated at the same time?

In the opkg case they will get upgraded sequentially in reverse dependency order (or something close to it, opkg has seen a lot of fixes in that area). If the package where the file moved to gets upgraded before the package where it used to be the upgrade will fail.

In this specific case, I don't know what the perl script does, I'd be tempted to move it into its own package and have the -dev package RRECOMMEND it if it's for development. If it's not for development, just put it in its own package and see if RRECOMMENDS/RDEPENDS are needed. And make sure someone actually runtime tests the results.

Hongxu Jia

author

2014-11-13 15:22 UTC #11 lore raw

In reply to Koen Kooi

Quoted 1 line · Koen Kooi

This breaks the upgrade path

Would you please paste the failed log, and the test steps, with details that I could try to fix that.

//Hongxu

Quoted 1 line

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----