[OE-core] [PATCH 1/4] alsa-utils: Pass udev-rules-dir as parameter

[Constantin Musca]

On 12/12/2012 04:07 AM, ChenQi wrote:
> On 12/11/2012 11:29 PM, Constantin Musca wrote:
>> Fix the following warning:
>> WARNING: QA Issue: alsa-utils: Files/directories were installed but 
>> not shipped
>>    /lib
>>    /lib/udev
>>    /lib/udev/rules.d
>>    /lib/udev/rules.d/90-alsa-restore.rules
>>
>> [YOCTO #3440]
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Constantin Musca<constantinx.musca at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-utils_1.0.25.bb | 4 ++--
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-utils_1.0.25.bb 
>> b/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-utils_1.0.25.bb
>> index 597e8b6..8f28a48 100644
>> --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-utils_1.0.25.bb
>> +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-utils_1.0.25.bb
>> @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ LICENSE = "GPLv2+"
>>   LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = 
>> "file://COPYING;md5=59530bdf33659b29e73d4adb9f9f6552 \
>> file://alsactl/utils.c;beginline=1;endline=20;md5=fe9526b055e246b5558809a5ae25c0b9"
>>   DEPENDS = "alsa-lib ncurses libsamplerate0"
>> -PR = "r2"
>> +PR = "r3"
>>
>>   SRC_URI = 
>> "ftp://ftp.alsa-project.org/pub/utils/alsa-utils-${PV}.tar.bz2 \
>>              file://ncursesfix.patch \
>> @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ SRC_URI[sha256sum] = 
>> "2e676a2f634bbfe279b260e10a96f617cb72ee63c5bbf6c5f96bb61570
>>   # http://bugs.openembedded.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2348
>>   # please close bug and remove this comment when properly fixed
>>   #
>> -EXTRA_OECONF = "--disable-xmlto"
>> +EXTRA_OECONF = "--disable-xmlto 
>> --with-udev-rules-dir=${base_libdir}/udev/rules.d"
>>   EXTRA_OECONF_append_libc-uclibc = " --disable-nls"
>>
>>   inherit autotools gettext
> Hi Musca,
> Another bug is related to the udev rules directory. It's similar to 
> this one.
> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2804
> (You could also use 'udev' to filter the message in oe-core list to 
> see the previous discussions on this topic.)
> It seems alsa-utils does not seem to be the only package that 
> hardcodes its udev-rules-dir.
> Besides, udev cannot start properly if installed under /lib64.
>
> #!/bin/sh
>
> ### BEGIN INIT INFO
> # Provides:          udev
> # Required-Start:    mountvirtfs
> # Required-Stop:
> # Default-Start:     S
> # Default-Stop:
> # Short-Description: Start udevd, populate /dev and load drivers.
> ### END INIT INFO
>
> export TZ=/etc/localtime
>
> [ -d /sys/class ] || exit 1
> [ -r /proc/mounts ] || exit 1
> [ -x /lib/udev/udevd ] || exit 1
> [ -f /etc/default/udev-cache ] && . /etc/default/udev-cache
> [ -f /etc/udev/udev.conf ] && . /etc/udev/udev.conf
>
> The question here is:
> Whether we should always install udev under /lib or patch all packages 
> that hardcodes udev-rules-dir to be under '/lib'. Maybe there are 
> other better approaches?
>
> Please have a look at these and let me know your opinions.
>
> Thanks a lot,
> Chen Qi

I think the best solution is to patch all packages that hardcode the 
udev-rules-dir path to use ${base_libdir}/udev/rules.d (this is the 
standard path). udev doesn't start properly if installed under /lib64 
because the init script hardcodes the udevd path (/lib/udev/udevd). If 
everybody is ok with this, I will send another patch for pcmciautils 
which sets udevdir to ${base_libdir}/udev/.


Cheers,
Constantin