[oe] [PATCH] [meta-networking][PATCH] packagegroup-samba: new add

[Zheng, Ruoqin]

Hi Andreas！
   I have some questions here:

   1. Why don't you just create a samba-client meta package inside the samba recipe instead?
      Well, I don't know how to create a samba-client meta package, and could you help me?

   2. All samba libraries already depend on samba-common, so samba depends on it indirectly. Therefore this "package group" doesn't seem to be necessary.
       Yes, I found it, thank you.

> +
> +SUMMARY_${PN}-ctdb-tests = " samba ctdb-tests"
> +RDEPENDS_${PN}-ctdb-tests = "samba-ctdb-tests"
> +
> +SUMMARY_${PN}-pidl = "samba-pidl"
> +RDEPENDS_${PN}-pidl = "samba-pidl"

   3. These two seem to be unnecessary, too.
      Testsuite for samba is unnecessary for the packagegroup, why?
      And can you give me a advice about how to deal with samba-pidl?Put it into client?


--------------------------------------------------
Zheng Ruoqin
Nanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech. Co., Ltd.(FNST)
ADDR.: No.6 Wenzhu Road, Software Avenue,
       Nanjing, 210012, China
MAIL : zhengrq.fnst at cn.fujistu.com


-----Original Message-----
From: openembedded-devel-bounces at lists.openembedded.org [mailto:openembedded-devel-bounces at lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Oberritter
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 9:29 PM
To: openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCH] [meta-networking][PATCH] packagegroup-samba: new add

Hi Zheng,

On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 17:33:07 +0800
zhengrq <zhengrq.fnst at cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> Add packagegroup for samba, for there are too many rpms in samba and it's hard to manage.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zheng Ruoqin <zhengrq.fnst at cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  .../packagegroups/packagegroup-samba.bb            | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 
> meta-networking/recipes-connectivity/packagegroups/packagegroup-samba.
> bb
> 
> diff --git 
> a/meta-networking/recipes-connectivity/packagegroups/packagegroup-samb
> a.bb 
> b/meta-networking/recipes-connectivity/packagegroups/packagegroup-samb
> a.bb
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..6177691
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/meta-networking/recipes-connectivity/packagegroups/packagegroup-
> +++ samba.bb
> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
> +SUMMARY = "samba package groups"
> +PV = "1.0"
> +PR = "r2"
> +
> +inherit packagegroup
> +
> +PROVIDES = "${PACKAGES}"
> +PACKAGES = "${PN}-server ${PN}-client ${PN}-ctdb-tests ${PN}-pidl"
> +
> +SUMMARY_${PN}-client = " samba client"
> +RDEPENDS_${PN}-client = "\
> +    smbclient \
> +    samba-common \
> +    winbind \
> +    registry-tools \
> +    "

Why don't you just create a samba-client meta package inside the samba recipe instead?

> +
> +SUMMARY_${PN}-server = " samba server"
> +RDEPENDS_${PN}-server = "\
> +    samba \
> +    samba-common \
> +    "

All samba libraries already depend on samba-common, so samba depends on it indirectly. Therefore this "package group" doesn't seem to be necessary.

> +
> +SUMMARY_${PN}-ctdb-tests = " samba ctdb-tests"
> +RDEPENDS_${PN}-ctdb-tests = "samba-ctdb-tests"
> +
> +SUMMARY_${PN}-pidl = "samba-pidl"
> +RDEPENDS_${PN}-pidl = "samba-pidl"

These two seem to be unnecessary, too.

Regards,
Andreas
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel