[OE-core] [PATCH] libproxy: add dependency on glib-2.0

[Paul Gortmaker]

On 12-08-17 05:41 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 14:07 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
>> On 12-08-17 12:57 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 18:43 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
>>>> Without this, you will get occasional build failures if libproxy
>>>> tries to build before the glib headers are placed in the sysroot.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker at windriver.com>
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/libproxy/libproxy_0.4.7.bb b/meta/recipes-support/libproxy/libproxy_0.4.7.bb
>>>> index 7e3cf27..a39e3a8 100644
>>>> --- a/meta/recipes-support/libproxy/libproxy_0.4.7.bb
>>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-support/libproxy/libproxy_0.4.7.bb
>>>> @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ LICENSE = "LGPLv2.1+"
>>>>  LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=7d7044444a7b1b116e8783edcdb44ff4 \
>>>>                      file://utils/proxy.c;beginline=1;endline=18;md5=55152a1006d7dafbef32baf9c30a99c0"
>>>>  
>>>> -DEPENDS = "gconf"
>>>> +DEPENDS = "gconf glib-2.0"
>>>>  
>>>
>>> We've gone around in circles on this and had issues over circular
>>> dependencies. The bottom line is that we don't need glib-2.0 here, we
>>> want to disable the glib-2.0 using components of libproxy. I don't know
>>
>> Fair enough.
>>
>> Can we _finally_ fix the mailing lists to not override the To/Cc lines
>> with crap Reply-To: lines?  Once again I almost missed seeing this reply,
>> since I was no longer on the To/Cc.
>>
>> AFAICT, all were in agreement that it was broken, but it never got fixed.
> 
> There were a few things causing problems here such as lost admin access.
> Those have been resolved and I just changed the setting that I think was
> causing the problems. Let me know if there are still issues...

Looks good now, thanks a lot. Much appreciated by many, I'm sure.

Paul.
--

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Richard
>