[oe] Any reasons not to use "newer" ppp?

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Op 01-07-11 17:39, Steffen Sledz schreef:
> On 30.06.2011 12:15, Phil Blundell wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 12:12 +0200, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>> The current oe-dev master contains recipes for 2.4.4 and 2.4.5,
>>> but both are DEFAULT_PREFERENCE = "-1", so 2.4.3 is used by
>>> default.
>>> 
>>> We hit a problem in LCP open/close handling which is fixed in the
>>> newer versions.
>>> 
>>> Is there any reason *not* to go to 2.4.5?
>> 
>> Oe-core is using 2.4.5 and presumably it works OK there.  Judging
>> from the commit messages there is no good reason for 2.4.5 to have
>> been set D_P=-1 in oe.dev, so I think you should be safe to
>> upgrade.
> 
> While making some investingations in this i hit another problem.
> 
> The recipe *ppp_2.4.5.bb* in *oe-core* contains lines like these: 
> ------------------>snip<------------------- FILES_${PN}-dbg +=
> "${libdir}/pppd/2.4.3/.debug" FILES_ppp-oa       =
> "/usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/pppoatm.so" FILES_ppp-oe       =
> "/usr/sbin/pppoe-discovery /usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/rp-pppoe.so" 
> FILES_ppp-radius   = "/usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/radius.so
> /usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/radattr.so /usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/radrealms.so" 
> FILES_ppp-winbind  = "/usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/winbind.so" 
> FILES_ppp-minconn  = "/usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/minconn.so" 
> FILES_ppp-password = "/usr/lib/pppd/2.4.3/pass*.so" 
> ------------------>snip<-------------------
> 
> I can't imagine that it is intentionally to have hardcoded pathes
> with *2.4.3* in it here.
> 
> The ppp_2.4.5.bb recipe in oe-dev looks much cleaner. Is there
> someone who feels as a maintainer of ppp and can do some housekeeping
> here?

The OE-core recipe also has a ton of QA errors being reported, so I
wouldn't use that as an example of how to do things.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFODe3qMkyGM64RGpERAj5XAJ9cHJUSIcJ6sS6bqfNYSTYB6/KgSgCeNxZk
i6REs8lKOlBywYBoXpzt+PA=
=5yYU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----