[OE-core] [PATCH] alsa-lib: Allow empty alsa-lib package for SDK

[Joshua Watt]

On Fri, 2018-08-03 at 14:21 +0100, Burton, Ross wrote:
> I agree with Tanu, the packaging in this recipe is non-standard and
> instead of making it more non-standard, let's just fix it.
> 
> Remove the libasound recipe, the contents of that can go into $PN.
> Either way with Debian renaming it gets renamed to libasound2, and
> without renaming it's still a sensible name.  The dependency hacks
> can
> then all be removed.

Done. Sorry I, forgot the "in-reply-to" when I sent the update. See: 
http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2018-August/1
53684.html

> 
> Ross
> 
> On 3 August 2018 at 11:39, Tanu Kaskinen <tanuk at iki.fi> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-08-02 at 16:22 -0500, Joshua Watt wrote:
> > > Without ALLOW_EMPTY, the empty alsa-lib package (which gets
> > > culled)
> > > makes it fairly difficult to create an image that has libasound,
> > > then
> > > create an SDK from that image that has the proper development
> > > files.
> > > 
> > > If there is no alsa-lib package, the only way to get libasound on
> > > a
> > > target image is to do:
> > > 
> > >  IMAGE_INSTALL += "libasound"
> > > 
> > > This however causes a problem because all of the development
> > > files that
> > > would be desired in the SDK are located in alsa-lib-dev, which
> > > won't be
> > > included (because alsa-lib wasn't included). Without
> > > ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN},
> > > it is not possible to do:
> > > 
> > >  IMAGE_INSTALL += "alsa-lib"
> > > 
> > > because the package is empty and gets culled. Adding the
> > > ALLOW_EMPTY and
> > > then making alsa-lib RDEPEND on libasound solves this problem and
> > > allows
> > > alsa-lib to be installed on the target and have the correct
> > > development
> > > files in the SDK
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Joshua Watt <JPEWhacker at gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.1.6.bb | 7 +++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.1.6.bb
> > > b/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.1.6.bb
> > > index 6364e9eafaa..581655c5349 100644
> > > --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.1.6.bb
> > > +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.1.6.bb
> > > @@ -24,6 +24,13 @@ FILES_libasound = "${libdir}/libasound.so.*"
> > >  FILES_alsa-server = "${bindir}/*"
> > >  FILES_alsa-conf = "${datadir}/alsa/"
> > > 
> > > +# Create an alsa-lib package even though it is empty and make it
> > > RDEPEND on
> > > +# libasound for target builds. This makes it possible to sanely
> > > create a image
> > > +# that has libasound and then generate an SDK from that image
> > > that has
> > > +# alsa-lib-dev
> > > +ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"
> > > +RDEPENDS_${PN}_class-target = "libasound"
> > > +
> > >  RDEPENDS_libasound = "alsa-conf"
> > > 
> > >  # alsa-lib gets automatically added to alsa-lib-dev
> > > dependencies, but the
> > 
> > Looks fine to me, although renaming alsa-lib-dev to libasound-dev
> > would
> > seem like a sensible option too.
> > 
> > --
> > Tanu
> > 
> > https://www.patreon.com/tanuk
> > https://liberapay.com/tanuk
> > --
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openembedded-core mailing list
> > Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
> > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
-- 
Joshua Watt <JPEWhacker at gmail.com>