[OE-core] [PATCH] pr-util: insert appropriate parameter to adapt libtool

[Richard Purdie]

On Mon, 2013-11-18 at 18:31 +0800, yanjun.zhu wrote:
> When ccache is enabled, a parameter "ccache" is inserted.
> libtool can not handle this parameter correctly. So "--tag=CC"
> is introduced to help libtool handle it.
> ---
>  meta/recipes-support/apr/apr-util_1.5.2.bb |    5 +++++
>  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/apr/apr-util_1.5.2.bb b/meta/recipes-support/apr/apr-util_1.5.2.bb
> index ea0f7fb..d6ae394 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-support/apr/apr-util_1.5.2.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-support/apr/apr-util_1.5.2.bb
> @@ -34,6 +34,11 @@ do_configure_append() {
>  	if [ "${CLASSOVERRIDE}" = "class-target" ]; then
>  		cp ${STAGING_DATADIR}/apr/apr_rules.mk ${S}/build/rules.mk
>  	fi
> +
> +	# When ccache is enabled, libtool needs --tag=CC to choose correct handle methods.
> +	if [ -f ${S}/build/rules.mk ]; then
> +		sed -i "s,^LTFLAGS,LTFLAGS      = --silent --tag=CC\n#LTFLAGS,g" ${S}/build/rules.mk
> +	fi
>  }
>  do_configure_prepend_class-native() {
>  	cp ${STAGING_DATADIR_NATIVE}/apr/apr_rules.mk ${S}/build/rules.mk

This looks like something better done with a specific patch along with
an explanation in the patch header. Is there any reason upstream
wouldn't do this?

By using a patch we ensure that when things are upgraded, the right
thing still gets done. You may need to update the apr recipe itself to
get the patch right.

Cheers,

Richard