[oe] [meta-java][PATCH] openjdk-8: fix rewrite QA warnings

[Otavio Salvador]

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Jens Rehsack <rehsack at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Am 15.12.2015 um 13:50 schrieb Otavio Salvador <otavio.salvador at ossystems.com.br>:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Jens Rehsack <rehsack at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 15.12.2015 um 13:31 schrieb Otavio Salvador <otavio.salvador at ossystems.com.br>:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Jens Rehsack <rehsack at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Fix bitbake warnings from variable renaming like
>>>>>
>>>>>   Variable key FILES_${PN} (${bindir}/* ${sbindir}/* ${libexecdir}/* ${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS} ${sysconfdir} ${sharedstatedir} ${localstatedir} ${base_bindir}/* ${base_sbindir}/* ${base_libdir}/*${SOLIBS} ${base_prefix}/lib/udev/rules.d ${prefix}/lib/udev/rules.d ${datadir}/${BPN} ${libdir}/${BPN}/* ${datadir}/pixmaps ${datadir}/applications ${datadir}/idl ${datadir}/omf ${datadir}/sounds ${libdir}/bonobo/servers) replaces original key FILES_openjre-8 (    ${JRE_HOME}/bin/[a-z]*     ${JRE_HOME}/lib/[a-z]*     ${JRE_HOME}/LICENSE     ${JRE_HOME}/release ).
>>>>>
>>>>> It is caused by using FILES_${PN} and FILES_{JDKPN} or FILES_${JREPN},
>>>>> respectively. Moving FILES_{JDKPN} to openjdk-8_%.bb and FILES_${JREPN} to
>>>>> openjre-8_%.bb to allow consequently use FILES_${PN}.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Rehsack <sno at netbsd.org>
>>>>
>>>> Looking at the proposed change, it seems it would be better to squash
>>>> the JDK and JRE installation to a single recipe and do the proper
>>>> split using the packaging.
>>>>
>>>> Do you think this is reasonable?
>>>
>>> I split openjdk-8/openjre-8 because of weird behavior wrt.
>>>
>>> PREFERRED_PROVIDER_java2-runtime = "openjdk-8-jre"
>>>
>>> but I think with all the things I learned during packaging openjdk-8
>>> and nqp/perl6 I can retry.
>>>
>>> This will require lots of tests, so unfortunately it's unlikely
>>> to manage it this year - maybe even not before our planned HP1 update
>>> release.
>>
>> Right; it is not a problem and I think this could be merged as an
>> intermediate solution, in meanwhile.
>
> Would be great.
>
>> However I think consolidating it
>> into a single recipe would give us some benefits as: faster builds,
>> single recipe to manage, removal of .inc file at all.
>
> Dunno how reasonable it is to install openjre and openjdk on on target,
> so I don't see the faster builds. However - for dev or test targets:
> *shrug* - I do my best to add no conflicts for most liberal use :)
>
> Reducing .inc's is your favorite goal, isn't it? :D

When we can consolidate things in a single recipe, most of time, it
makes it easier to improve and hack. So it is something we  should go
after for sure.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750