[OE-core] [PATCH 1/4] avahi.inc: use avahi-daemon as avahi's provider

[Koen Kooi]

> Op 10 nov. 2014, om 08:35 heeft Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia at windriver.com> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> On 11/10/2014 02:42 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
>> The docs say that IMAGE_INSTALL is for "package_name". So I think it's
>> correct that it fails when you put "recipe_name" in it and sometimes
>> there isn't any package with the same name. It's the same as trying to
>> make RDEPENDS/DEPENDS entries to be interchangeable (putting
>> recipe_names to RDEPENDS and package_names to DEPENDS)."
>> 
>> Especially with that patch for xinput-pointercal, if user explicitly
>> asks for installing xinput-pointercal, what's the reason to create him
>> completely empty package? IMHO it's only hiding that issue from him and
>> instead of discovering the issue in do_rootfs task, he has to check
>> generated rootfs or even boot the device.
> 
> For most recipes, they generate packages with recipe name, it is not
> convenience to figure out the different between package_name and
> recipe_name, especially for newbies, which I means we should reduce
> that convenience, build relationship between recipe and package,
> especially when the recipe doesn't generate the same name package.

It is not a bug when recipe foo.bb doesn't generate foo.ipk. Your changes introduce needless churn and break upgrade paths only to cater to people making wrong assumptions.