[oe] [meta-xfce][PATCH] meta-xfce: xfconf: fixup installed-vs-shipped QA issue

[Mark Asselstine]

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 12:02 PM Mark Asselstine
<mark.asselstine at windriver.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 12:00 PM Mark Asselstine
> <mark.asselstine at windriver.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wednesday, November 7, 2018 11:55:08 AM EST Khem Raj wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 8:40 AM Mark Asselstine
> > >
> > > <mark.asselstine at windriver.com> wrote:
> > > > Since the xfconf uprev, commit 4222cac97678 [xfconf: 4.13.5 ->
> > > >
> > > > 4.13.6], we are getting a QA issue:
> > > >   ERROR: xfconf-4.13.6-r0 do_package: QA Issue: xfconf: Files/directories
> > > >   were installed but not shipped in any package:
> > > >   /usr/lib64/gio/modules/libxfconfgsettingsbackend.la
> > > >   Please set FILES such that these items are packaged. Alternatively if
> > > >   they are unneeded, avoid installing them or delete them within
> > > >   do_install. xfconf: 1 installed and not shipped files.
> > > >   [installed-vs-shipped]
> > > >   ERROR: xfconf-4.13.6-r0 do_package: Fatal QA errors found, failing task.
> > > >   ERROR: xfconf-4.13.6-r0 do_package: Function failed: do_package
> > > >
> > > > We need to include the .la file in the -dev package to avoid this.
> > >
> > > can we just delete it.
> >
> > I am fine with that, it is of little use. In the past I have asked Mark Hatle
> > for advice on package vs. delete and I never get a clear answer one way or the
> > other. I am sure if you look at my patch history 50% of the time I have some
> > that delete these and the other 50% I keep them.
> >
> > In this case there are already other .la files in the -dev package so I just
> > went along with the keep approach.
>
> Sorry, I wasn't clear on what I will do. I will send a V2 and make use
> of remove-libtool to take care of the cleanup.
>

Actually, Khem, if we go back to our discussion back in June
http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2018-June/118896.html

we ended up packaging the .la files. If the distro were to use
remove-libtool then they would be cleaned up. So based on that I stand
by my V1.

Thoughts?

MarkA

> MarkA
>
> >
> > MarkA
> >
> > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Asselstine <mark.asselstine at windriver.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > >  meta-xfce/recipes-xfce/xfconf/xfconf_4.13.6.bb | 2 ++
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/meta-xfce/recipes-xfce/xfconf/xfconf_4.13.6.bb
> > > > b/meta-xfce/recipes-xfce/xfconf/xfconf_4.13.6.bb index 191d0fd..2667ff9
> > > > 100644
> > > > --- a/meta-xfce/recipes-xfce/xfconf/xfconf_4.13.6.bb
> > > > +++ b/meta-xfce/recipes-xfce/xfconf/xfconf_4.13.6.bb
> > > > @@ -14,3 +14,5 @@ SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
> > > > "d1a3d442dae188b5a7380b5815377e5488578cdafb03ae363e9426e3b0>
> > > >  FILES_${PN} += "${libdir}/xfce4/xfconf/xfconfd \
> > > >
> > > >                  ${libdir}/gio/modules/libxfconfgsettingsbackend.so \
> > > >                  ${datadir}/dbus-1/services/org.xfce.Xfconf.service"
> > > >
> > > > +
> > > > +FILES_${PN}-dev += "${libdir}/gio/modules/libxfconfgsettingsbackend.la"
> > > > --
> > > > 2.7.4
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Openembedded-devel mailing list
> > > > Openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
> > > > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openembedded-devel mailing list
> > Openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
> > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel