Re: [meta-networking][PATCH 2/2 v2] ncp: add v1.2.4

["André Draszik" <git@andred.net>]

On Wed, 2016-11-16 at 09:28 -0800, Khem Raj wrote:
> 
> On 11/16/16 1:02 AM, André Draszik wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: André Draszik <git@andred.net>
> > ---
> >  meta-networking/recipes-support/ncp/ncp_1.2.4.bb | 32
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 meta-networking/recipes-support/ncp/ncp_1.2.4.bb
> > 
> > diff --git a/meta-networking/recipes-support/ncp/ncp_1.2.4.bb b/meta-
> > networking/recipes-support/ncp/ncp_1.2.4.bb
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..7bbaaad
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/meta-networking/recipes-support/ncp/ncp_1.2.4.bb
> > @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
> > +SUMMARY = "a fast file copy tool for LANs"
> > +DESCRIPTION = "ncp is a utility for copying files in a LAN. It has
> > absolutely no \
> > +security or integrity checking, no throttling, no features, except \
> > +one: you don't have to type the coordinates of your peer."
> > +HOMEPAGE = "http://www.fefe.de/ncp"
> > +LICENSE = "GPLv2"
> > +LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${COREBASE}/meta/files/common-licenses/GPL-
> > 2.0;md5=801f80980d171dd6425610833a22dbe6"
> > +DEPENDS = "libowfat"
> > +
> > +SRC_URI = "https://dl.fefe.de/${BP}.tar.bz2"
> > +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "421c4855bd3148b7d0a4342942b4bf13"
> > +SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
> > "6cfa72edd5f7717bf7a4a93ccc74c4abd89892360e2e0bb095a73c24b9359b88"
> > +
> > +EXTRA_OEMAKE = "\
> > +    DIET= \
> > +    DEBUG=nostrip \
> > +    CC='${CC}' CFLAGS='${CFLAGS} -I${STAGING_INCDIR}/libowfat'
> > LDFLAGS='${LDFLAGS}' \
> > +"
> 
> Is setting CC etc. on make cmdline really needed ?

Yes, the Makefile sets CC CFLAGS LDFLAGS excplicitly, so make doesn't
inherit them from the environment variables, because OE doesn't pass the -e
make flag anymore. https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Enviro
nment.html#Environment

> may be just adding the -I flags to CPPFLAGS is enough ?

It doesn't respect CPPFLAGS, but an alternative would be:

EXTRA_OEMAKE = "\
    DIET= \
    DEBUG=nostrip \
    -e \
"
CFLAGS_append = " -I${STAGING_INCDIR}/libowfat"

I have no preference either way, but my original version makes it more
obvious what we're after.


> > +
> > +do_install() {
> > +    install -d -m0755 ${D}${bindir}
> 
> not needed if you can just do
> 
> install -D -m 0755 ncp ${D}${bindir}/ncp
> 
> and avoid two calls to install ( one for dir and another for file )
> 
> > +    install -d -m0755 ${D}${mandir}/man1
> > +
> > +    install -m0755 ncp ${D}${bindir}
> 
> 
> > +    ln -sf ncp ${D}${bindir}/npoll
> > +    ln -sf ncp ${D}${bindir}/npush
> > +
> > +    install -m0644 ncp.1 npush.1 ${D}${mandir}/man1
> 
> same here not needed.

Using -D that'd still need two calls, as multiple files are being copied and
-D only allows you to specify one destination (I think). Not really gaining
anything here. In addition, you have to specify the source filename multiple
times (in src and destination).
This:
    install -d -m0755 ${D}${mandir}/man1
    install -m0644 ncp.1 npush.1 ${D}${mandir}/man1
vs.
    install -D -m0644 ncp.1 ${D}${mandir}/man1/ncp.1
    install -D -m0644 npush.1 ${D}${mandir}/man1/npush.1


Cheers,
Andre'