[OE-core] [PATCH 3/4] kernel: Add kernel-headers package for target module build

[Khem Raj]

On Friday, June 29, 2012, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield at windriver.com>
wrote:
> On 12-06-29 09:36 AM, Darren Hart wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 06/29/2012 06:15 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12-06-29 03:22 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Darren Hart<dvhart at linux.intel.com>
  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 06/28/2012 11:04 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Darren Hart<dvhart at linux.intel.com>
  wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, I don't have a strong opinion here, I'll happily call it
>>>>>>> kernel-devel if that is strongly preferred by some.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> in oe terminology it will be -dev
>>>>>
>>>>> THe other reason I didn't go that route is that we already have a
>>>>> kernel-dev (although I don't much like the way it is used):
>>>>>
>>>>>  From kernel.bbclass:
>>>>>
>>>>> PACKAGES = "kernel kernel-base kernel-vmlinux kernel-image kernel-dev
\
>>>>>             kernel-misc kernel-headers"
>>>>> FILES = ""
>>>>> FILES_kernel-image = "/boot/${KERNEL_IMAGETYPE}*"
>>>>> FILES_kernel-dev = "/boot/System.map* /boot/Module.symvers*
/boot/config*"
>>>>> FILES_kernel-vmlinux = "/boot/vmlinux*"
>>>>> # misc is a package to contain files we need in staging
>>>>> FILES_kernel-misc = "/kernel/include/config /kernel/scripts
>>>>> /kernel/drivers/crypto /kernel/drivers/media"
>>>>> FILES_kernel-headers = "/usr/src/kernel-headers"
>>>>>
>>>>> And looking at that it appears I broke kernel-misc by moving things to
>>>>> /usr/src (didn't notice that in my testing).
>>>>>
>>>>> How would you propose we redefine the above in order to use
"kernel-dev"
>>>>> for the new package?
>>>>
>>>> hmmm interesting so I guess, linux-dev being already taken, you might
>>>> call it linux-kernel-headers as you were doing. So we have
>>>> linux-libc-headers and linux-kernel-headers to differentiate between
>>>> raw and sanitized headers
>>>
>>> What would break if the new files were simply added to the existing
>>> kernel-dev
>>> package ? I'm already putting System.map and others on targets in
>>> different environments for dev/debug, so would adding enough to build
>>> kernel modules on the target be a big problem ?
>>
>>
>> I was considering this last night as well.
>>
>>> But I probably just don't understand *what* the existing -dev package
>>> is used for, and my comment makes no sense :)
>>
>> And I landed here as well.
>
> :)
>
>>
>> Should we attempt this approach and only break them apart if somebody
>> screams?
>
> In the absence of definitely proof that we are missing something, I'm
> ok with suggesting that we have a single -dev package.
>
>>
>>>
>>> Outside of that, I also like linux-kernel-headers as the package name.
>>
>> Would you prefer this even if we merge it with the existing kernel-dev?
>> I think my order of preference would be:
>>
>> 1) Merge with kernel-dev and leave the name as kernel-dev for
>>    consistency
>>
>> 2) New package called linux-kernel-headers
>
> Is there a 3rd option of a virtual package called linux-kernel-headers
> that maps to -dev ? I have no idea if that is even possible or desirable,
> but I thought I'd mention it.
>
> I like #1, since we really are talking about development vs just some
> headers lying around :)
>

I think packaging more into -dev is OK upgrade wise so let's use kernel-dev
and.put it in usr/src/kernel
> Cheers,
>
> Bruce
>
>>
>> --
>> Darren
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Bruce
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Darren Hart
>>>>> Intel Open Source Technology Center
>>>>> Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20120629/32a3b943/attachment-0002.html>