[PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages

[PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages

[jackie.huang]

From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>

All dev related items should be packaged in the core
PN-dev package not in seperate packages.

Signed-off-by: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
---
 meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.0.27.2.bb | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.0.27.2.bb b/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.0.27.2.bb
index cbe0448..9132072 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.0.27.2.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.0.27.2.bb
@@ -31,14 +31,13 @@ EXTRA_OECONF = "--disable-python"
 
 EXTRA_OECONF_append_libc-uclibc = " --with-versioned=no "
 
-PACKAGES =+ "alsa-server libasound alsa-conf-base alsa-conf alsa-doc alsa-dev"
+PACKAGES =+ "alsa-server libasound alsa-conf-base alsa-conf alsa-doc"
 FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/${BPN}/smixer/*.so"
 FILES_${PN}-dbg += "${libdir}/${BPN}/smixer/.debug"
 FILES_${PN}-dev += "${libdir}/${BPN}/smixer/*.la"
 FILES_libasound = "${libdir}/libasound.so.*"
 FILES_alsa-server = "${bindir}/*"
 FILES_alsa-conf = "${datadir}/alsa/"
-FILES_alsa-dev += "${libdir}/pkgconfig/ ${includedir}/alsa ${datadir}/aclocal/*"
 FILES_alsa-conf-base = "\
 ${datadir}/alsa/alsa.conf \
 ${datadir}/alsa/cards/aliases.conf \
-- 
2.0.0

Re: [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages

[Koen Kooi]

Op 25 jul. 2014, om 12:05 heeft jackie.huang@windriver.com het volgende geschreven:

> From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> 
> All dev related items should be packaged in the core
> PN-dev package not in seperate packages.

What's the upgrade path here for image and users that have 'alsa-dev' installed? Looks like there are now 2 conflicting packages, 'alsa-dev' in the feeds and 'alsa-lib-dev' on OE, without and RREPLACES/RPROVIDES in place.

Re: [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages

[Huang, Jie (Jackie)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Koen Kooi [mailto:koen@dominion.thruhere.net]
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 2:30 PM
> To: Huang, Jie (Jackie)
> Cc: OE-core; Richard Purdie
> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages
> 
> 
> Op 25 jul. 2014, om 12:05 heeft jackie.huang@windriver.com het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> >
> > All dev related items should be packaged in the core PN-dev package
> > not in seperate packages.
> 
> What's the upgrade path here for image and users that have 'alsa-dev' installed? Looks like there are

My patch is removing 'alsa-dev' and all related files goes into '${PN}-dev' (PN=alsa-lib here), so users need to install
alsa-lib-dev instead of alsa-dev.

> now 2 conflicting packages, 'alsa-dev' in the feeds and 'alsa-lib-dev' on OE, without and

Only 'alsa-lib-dev' now with my patch, so no conflicts.

Thanks,
Jackie

> RREPLACES/RPROVIDES in place.

Re: [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages

[Koen Kooi]

Op 28 jul. 2014, om 08:49 heeft Huang, Jie (Jackie) <Jackie.Huang@windriver.com> het volgende geschreven:

> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Koen Kooi [mailto:koen@dominion.thruhere.net]
>> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 2:30 PM
>> To: Huang, Jie (Jackie)
>> Cc: OE-core; Richard Purdie
>> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages
>> 
>> 
>> Op 25 jul. 2014, om 12:05 heeft jackie.huang@windriver.com het volgende geschreven:
>> 
>>> From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
>>> 
>>> All dev related items should be packaged in the core PN-dev package
>>> not in seperate packages.
>> 
>> What's the upgrade path here for image and users that have 'alsa-dev' installed? Looks like there are
> 
> My patch is removing 'alsa-dev' and all related files goes into '${PN}-dev' (PN=alsa-lib here), so users need to install
> alsa-lib-dev instead of alsa-dev.

*sigh* So you have no upgrade path for situations where 'alsa-dev' is already installed or listed in a packagegroup or image. Worse, you don't even understand the problem :/

> 
>> now 2 conflicting packages, 'alsa-dev' in the feeds and 'alsa-lib-dev' on OE, without and
> 
> Only 'alsa-lib-dev' now with my patch, so no conflicts.

Hahahahahaha you are really funny.

Re: [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages

[Richard Purdie]

On Mon, 2014-07-28 at 10:51 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 28 jul. 2014, om 08:49 heeft Huang, Jie (Jackie) <Jackie.Huang@windriver.com> het volgende geschreven:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Koen Kooi [mailto:koen@dominion.thruhere.net]
> >> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 2:30 PM
> >> To: Huang, Jie (Jackie)
> >> Cc: OE-core; Richard Purdie
> >> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Op 25 jul. 2014, om 12:05 heeft jackie.huang@windriver.com het volgende geschreven:
> >> 
> >>> From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> >>> 
> >>> All dev related items should be packaged in the core PN-dev package
> >>> not in seperate packages.
> >> 
> >> What's the upgrade path here for image and users that have 'alsa-dev' installed? Looks like there are
> > 
> > My patch is removing 'alsa-dev' and all related files goes into '${PN}-dev' (PN=alsa-lib here), so users need to install
> > alsa-lib-dev instead of alsa-dev.
> 
> *sigh* So you have no upgrade path for situations where 'alsa-dev' is already installed or listed in a packagegroup or image. Worse, you don't even understand the problem :/
> 
> > 
> >> now 2 conflicting packages, 'alsa-dev' in the feeds and 'alsa-lib-dev' on OE, without and
> > 
> > Only 'alsa-lib-dev' now with my patch, so no conflicts.
> 
> Hahahahahaha you are really funny.

I appreciate there is a problem here and we need to fix that. There is
also an education issue, people who don't know much about it don't
appreciate the struggles of someone maintaining package feeds.

Perhaps someone could write a short section for the docs about the
issues here? In future when this kind of problem comes up, we can then
at least point at the manual section to explain it.

Currently, most docs come from the "same old people", I'm partly writing
this to remind people that others can submit them and that they can help
massively in educating people.

They don't even need to be proper patches against the docs, just write a
few paragraphs, send it Scott Rifenbark's way and he can usually do
something with it. He tends to reword things so the manual has a
consistent tone and style anyway so it needn't be word perfect either,
its the content that matters (and that is the part Scott cannot do).

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages

[Huang, Jie (Jackie)]

> 
> Op 28 jul. 2014, om 08:49 heeft Huang, Jie (Jackie) <Jackie.Huang@windriver.com> het volgende
> geschreven:
> 
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Koen Kooi [mailto:koen@dominion.thruhere.net]
> >> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 2:30 PM
> >> To: Huang, Jie (Jackie)
> >> Cc: OE-core; Richard Purdie
> >> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev
> >> packages
> >>
> >>
> >> Op 25 jul. 2014, om 12:05 heeft jackie.huang@windriver.com het volgende geschreven:
> >>
> >>> From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> >>>
> >>> All dev related items should be packaged in the core PN-dev package
> >>> not in seperate packages.
> >>
> >> What's the upgrade path here for image and users that have 'alsa-dev'
> >> installed? Looks like there are
> >
> > My patch is removing 'alsa-dev' and all related files goes into
> > '${PN}-dev' (PN=alsa-lib here), so users need to install alsa-lib-dev instead of alsa-dev.
> 
> *sigh* So you have no upgrade path for situations where 'alsa-dev' is already installed or listed in a
> packagegroup or image. Worse, you don't even understand the problem :/

I see your point, I did grep on oe-core and meta-oe and didn't find any evidence that 'alsa-dev' is installed or listed
In a packagegroup or image, so I thought it's safe to remove without RREPLACES/RPROVIDES in place, sorry that I did
a wrong assumption, I will add a RPROVIDES for this, thanks!

Thanks,
Jackie

> 
> >
> >> now 2 conflicting packages, 'alsa-dev' in the feeds and
> >> 'alsa-lib-dev' on OE, without and
> >
> > Only 'alsa-lib-dev' now with my patch, so no conflicts.
> 
> Hahahahahaha you are really funny.

Re: [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages

[Huang, Jie (Jackie)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Purdie [mailto:richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org]
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 5:25 PM
> To: Koen Kooi
> Cc: Huang, Jie (Jackie); OE-core; RIFENBARK, SCOTT
> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev packages
> 
> On Mon, 2014-07-28 at 10:51 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> > Op 28 jul. 2014, om 08:49 heeft Huang, Jie (Jackie) <Jackie.Huang@windriver.com> het volgende
> geschreven:
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Koen Kooi [mailto:koen@dominion.thruhere.net]
> > >> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 2:30 PM
> > >> To: Huang, Jie (Jackie)
> > >> Cc: OE-core; Richard Purdie
> > >> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] alsa-lib: remove non PN based -dev
> > >> packages
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Op 25 jul. 2014, om 12:05 heeft jackie.huang@windriver.com het volgende geschreven:
> > >>
> > >>> From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> > >>>
> > >>> All dev related items should be packaged in the core PN-dev
> > >>> package not in seperate packages.
> > >>
> > >> What's the upgrade path here for image and users that have
> > >> 'alsa-dev' installed? Looks like there are
> > >
> > > My patch is removing 'alsa-dev' and all related files goes into
> > > '${PN}-dev' (PN=alsa-lib here), so users need to install alsa-lib-dev instead of alsa-dev.
> >
> > *sigh* So you have no upgrade path for situations where 'alsa-dev' is
> > already installed or listed in a packagegroup or image. Worse, you
> > don't even understand the problem :/
> >
> > >
> > >> now 2 conflicting packages, 'alsa-dev' in the feeds and
> > >> 'alsa-lib-dev' on OE, without and
> > >
> > > Only 'alsa-lib-dev' now with my patch, so no conflicts.
> >
> > Hahahahahaha you are really funny.
> 
> I appreciate there is a problem here and we need to fix that. There is also an education issue, people
> who don't know much about it don't appreciate the struggles of someone maintaining package feeds.

Sorry that I got misunderstanding about the commets since I didn't know much the issue, I appreciate that
and will send another patch to fix it since this one is already merged.

Thanks,
Jackie

> 
> Perhaps someone could write a short section for the docs about the issues here? In future when this
> kind of problem comes up, we can then at least point at the manual section to explain it.
> 
> Currently, most docs come from the "same old people", I'm partly writing this to remind people that
> others can submit them and that they can help massively in educating people.
> 
> They don't even need to be proper patches against the docs, just write a few paragraphs, send it Scott
> Rifenbark's way and he can usually do something with it. He tends to reword things so the manual has
> a consistent tone and style anyway so it needn't be word perfect either, its the content that matters
> (and that is the part Scott cannot do).
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Richard