[OE-core] [PATCH] Revert "kmod: Use base_libdir for installing libkmod"

[Richard Purdie]

On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 22:44 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 17 mei 2012 om 22:29 heeft Richard Purdie <richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 13:54 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Koen Kooi <koen at dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> >>> The commit breaks pkgconfig and after discussing it with the kmod and udev maintainers the conclusion was reached that putting the libraries in /lib instead of /usr/lib is not supported.
> >>> 
> >>> This reverts commit 6b74f2461735272bd950a4f060dab6e778a36f92.
> >> 
> >> while this is what I had initially it doesn't go well with kmod living in
> >> /sbin and accessing libraries from /usr due to our QA checks although
> >> I am all for simplifying it where we don't make this check at all.
> > 
> > I've had requests for it along with a commitment to fix it and patches.
> > If we decide we don't want this, fine and that will be the case if
> > patches are not forthcoming to fix the QA issues. I don't think we've
> > reached that point at this with that yet.
> > 
> > I've decided to accept this patch and "unbreak" meta-oe/udev at the
> > expense of screwing up OE-Core. I am however still deeply unhappy people
> > are trying to bypass OE-Core this way and then "blackmail" OE-Core using
> > breaking meta-oe as a reason. The whole systemd thing has been badly
> > handled and needs to get fixed properly.
> 
> What does systemd have to do with this?

Why does meta-oe has its own udev recipe? Is systemd related to that at
all?

>  This is about a broken commit breaking udev 182 for over a week.

OE-Core worked fine and the commit fixes QA warnings which are now back.

> If you have issues with systemd, send patches to meta-oe to fix it. Or
> at least bug reports that are more than the insinuations above. 

I looked in the README and followed that to other README files but
couldn't find any indication about what to do with bugs other than write
patches which I obviously don't have.

When will you be sending the patch to fix the QA warning your revert has
introduced? Yes this is a rhetorical question since I've seen your view
on this problem previously.

Cheers,

Richard