[oe] [PATCH 1/3] ipkg: remove legacy staging and install `libipkg.pc` properly

[Paul Menzel]

Dear Andreas,


Am Dienstag, den 22.03.2011, 15:58 +0100 schrieb Andreas Oberritter:

> On 03/22/2011 11:42 AM, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > --- a/recipes/ipkg/ipkg_0.99.163.bb
> > +++ b/recipes/ipkg/ipkg_0.99.163.bb
> > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> >  include ipkg.inc
> > -PR = "r8"
> > +PR = "r9"
> >  
> >  S = "${WORKDIR}/ipkg-${PV}"
> >  
> > @@ -12,15 +12,10 @@ SRC_URI = "http://www.handhelds.org/pub/packages/ipkg/ipkg-${PV}.tar.gz \
> >  	file://lonk-link-name.patch \
> >  	"
> >  
> > -do_stage() {
> > -	oe_libinstall -so libipkg ${STAGING_LIBDIR}
> > -	install -d ${STAGING_INCDIR}/libipkg/
> > -	for f in *.h
> > -	do
> > -		install -m 0644 $f ${STAGING_INCDIR}/libipkg/
> > -	done
> > +do_install () {
> > +	install -d ${D}${libdir}/pkgconfig
> > +	install -m 0644 ${WORKDIR}/libipkg.pc ${D}${libdir}/pkgconfig/libipkg.pc
> >  }
> 
> how do the library and headers get installed? Is there a do_install()
> inside ipkg.inc? In that case, you should use do_install_append()
> instead or move the two new lines to ipkg.inc.

I thought they were picked up automatically and got confused because I
had not run `bitbake -c clean libipkg` beforehand. I sent a v3 of this
patch.

> Despite this, I'd prefer moving it to obsolete, too.

I propose to push the cleanup and move it to obsolete afterward or
remove it right away. I am adding Florian to CC to let him comment on
`gpe-package`, which depends on `libipkg`.


Thanks,

Paul
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/attachments/20110322/6f7612d9/attachment-0002.sig>