[oe] [meta-oe][PATCH 1/3] samba: fix dependencies and QA issues

[Jens Rehsack]

> Am 11.11.2015 um 17:25 schrieb Khem Raj <raj.khem at gmail.com>:
> 
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 1:09 AM, Jens Rehsack <rehsack at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Am 11.11.2015 um 04:22 schrieb Khem Raj <raj.khem at gmail.com>:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Nov 10, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Jens Rehsack <rehsack at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Am 10.11.2015 um 22:42 schrieb Christopher Larson <clarson at kergoth.com>:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Jens Rehsack <rehsack at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> +                   ${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'sysvinit', 'lsb',
>>>>>> '', d)} \
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> This really requires lsb to able build, for all sysvinit distros? That
>>>>> seems unlikely. Was this intended to be based on the lsb distro feature?
>>>>> Also, why add lsb to rdepends independently of the packageconfig? I'd think
>>>>> using the packageconfig's 4th field for rdepends, if necessary, would work
>>>>> better, unless I'm missing something?
>>>> 
>>>> You do ;)
>>>> 
>>>> It uses the LSB init-script for systemv-init - and lsb doesn't suck in that
>>>> much that it hurts. But the line you quoted just adds an item to PACKAGECONFIG :)
>>>> Do a PACKAGECONFIG_remove-pn-samba = "lsb" to avoid the 4 scripts …
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> that should be tied to ‘lsb’ distro feature as it exists. Distro’s then automatically get the intended behavior based upon the selected distro policy.
>> 
>> I didn't find such a feature - is it intended to be introduced?
> '
> its called 'inuxstdbase' IIRC

grep remains silent regarding DISTRO_FEATURES and linuxstdbase :(

For the while, please make a suggestion for 2.0 how to ensure samba_4.1.12.bb:112
"install -m 0755 packaging/LSB/samba.sh ${D}${sysconfdir}/init.d" can work without that.

The PACKAGECONFIG lsb is absolutely correct for the behavior - it can be discussed
whether sysvinit shall automatically enable it or not. Since it's tiny ... why not?

When there is a sane linuxstdbase or lsb feature there, cleaning samba up distingishing
between lsb and pure sysv script is fine for me.

Question is: now? Or 2.1 / 2.0.1?

>> I only found a packagegroup for lsb, which is slightly overloaded
>> for common stuff.
>> 
>> Nevertheless - samba already uses the LSB init-script and so requires
>> the lsb init-functions. To fix currently broken status, this is
>> needed to be done - and splitting between rough sysvinit and lsb
>> init can be done in a following cleanup (and I'm happy to do it
>> if you insist).
>> 
>> Cheers

Cheers
-- 
Jens Rehsack - rehsack at gmail.com