This series of patches changes util-linux to splitting into one package per binary automatically, using do_split_packages()
* the first 5 patches are a general clean-up * patch 2 could be classed as avoiding a potential crash * patch 5 is important, as it fixes up some existing packaging problems * the subsequent patches are the actual implementation The slight 1st problem was that update alternatives was running right after copying from D to PKGD, and at that point in time PACKAGES and ALTERNATVE_xxx were expected to be fully populated. So I changed this slightly, so that util-linux can generate PACKAGES now right after perform_packagecopy(), but before update-alternatives processing. The small 2nd problem was that FILES_${PN} must reference the renamed file name (after update-alternatives has run). Given this is quite hard to do automatically when populating packages using do_split_packages(), I updated update-alternatives to update the file name in FILES_${PN} if the non-renamed file was specified in there. This would also allow updating all recipes to drop knowledge about that renaming where this is done at the moment. Finally, I am splitting up the packages, one commit per directory. Things to note and questions: * it is unclear to me why util-linux RDEPENDS vs. RRECOMMENDS some of the manually splitted packages before this series, and some of those pre-existing packages weren't in RRECOMMENDS or RDEPENDS at all. For that reason, the RDEPENDS on packages from base_sbindir and base_bindir that existed before this series, weren't updated, only new packages from those two directories have been added to RRECOMMENDS of the meta-package. I would suggest to drop all RDEPENDS and simply have util-linux RRECOMMENDS *all* the packages, but I don't know the origial reasoning for that distinction. * /etc/default/mountall is the only file remaining in the util-linux package. I am not sure what to do with it as I coulnd't find any user anyway. Can it be dropped altogether, should it be moved into the util-linux-mount package instead? Note that the util-linux-mount and util-linux-umount existed before this series, but /etc/default/mountall was still packaged into util-linux. * The pre-existing util-linux-swaponoff is a meta-package now, that simply RDEPENDS on -swapon and -swapoff, simply for backwards compatibility reasons, but is it really necessary, given people can now add -swapon and -swapoff if they want to. No harm in keeping it either, though. * the -dev package RRECOMMENDS some (but not all) of the split -dev packages (which don't necessarily exist), e.g. util-linux-losetup-dev Should it RPROVIDE those itself instead? Should those be made ALLOW_EMPTY? Should the RRECOMMENDS be tweaked? What is the preferred approach here? -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core