Re: [OE-core] RFC: pulseaudio vs. meson vs. neon

["Richard Purdie" <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, 2021-06-28 at 14:44 +0200, Andrea Adami wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 2:36 PM Alexander Kanavin
> <alex.kanavin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > What I am saying is, can you discuss this with upstream first please?
> 
> Sorry, no, I'm not in the position to do that.
> Besides, I am dispatching my armv4/armv5te Zaurus hardware so I will
> not be able to test anymore.
> 
> My point here is, for this pulseaudio 14.x release (in Honister) we
> could do an effort and patch the damn file.
> I write this because this is the only failing recipe for
> core-image-sato for armv4 and this arch is still supported in oe-core
> (thank you so much Khem).
> 
> So I'd say as long as armv4 and armv5t are supported we need to patch
> the recipe.
> 
> With next pulseaudio 15.x the older arm will maybe lose support, I
> don't know now.

We've left armv4 "support" in there mainly as it doesn't really cost us
anything to do so and does help some users. We're not in a position
where we have many people interested in helping carry patches like this
to pulseaudio.

What that means is that where there are fixes, they need to be easy to 
maintain and not impact the more modern tunes.

Hacking CC as in the patch you linked to isn't particularly nice, nor
is a global export it requires (changing the behaviour of other arches). 
It is also risky as the pulseaudio build system tries to do something
quite different and this workaround is liable to break.

I'm not against patching in an explicit option to pulseaudio but it
would also be good to mention that to upstream, raising the fact there
is a problem, contra to what their commit says.

Cheers,

Richard