Op 8 dec. 2011, om 22:59 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 17:12 +0000, Phil Blundell wrote: >> On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 16:55 +0000, Richard Purdie wrote: >>> The question is whether it makes sense to have directfb and X based gtk >>> in the same builds and package feeds or not. I can see that it might be >>> desired and that it likely is possible. >> >> This is true, though there's nothing to stop a distro that particularly >> wants this from inventing their own stub recipes which just set >> PACKAGECONFIG appropriately and then require the generic version. So >> it's really just a question of what we want to be the default in >> oe-core. >> >> Also note that, although you can parallel install multiple versions of >> the gtk+ runtime on the target system, if you want the build system to >> be deterministic then (in the absence of per-recipe sysroot >> construction) you need some way to decide which one gets to provide the >> gtk+-2.0.pc that other recipes will build against. (The different >> targets have different library sonames so you can't just swap them out >> at run time: a given binary will remain coupled to the particular Gtk >> variant that it was compiled against.) And if the two variants could >> conceivably be different versions of GTK then you also need a way to >> deconflict ${includedir}/gtk-2.0. >> >> So it isn't quite as simple as just having the two recipes, there is a >> bit of extra policy involved as well. And of course there would be all >> the normal overhead in terms of parse time, memory footprint and >> maintenance burden associated with having more recipes. > > This is the key detail I was missing. I thought they just might have > been a drop in replacement. > > That isn't the case so this makes the choice easier, I think separate > recipes don't make sense based on this. > >> So, in light of all the above plus the fact that everything is different >> with Gtk+3 anyway, my preference for supporting directfb on gtk+2 in >> oe-core would be to use PACKAGECONFIG and not have separate recipe >> files. > > Agreed, given the above.
So to be safe and give other directfb implementations a change, can this PACKAGECONFIG option be named 'gtk-directfb' in DISTRO_FEATURES?
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core