Op 10 jul. 2013, om 18:26 heeft Enrico Scholz <enrico.sch...@sigma-chemnitz.de>
het volgende geschreven:
> Saul Wold <sgw-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/c...@public.gmane.org> writes:
>
>> The PACKAGECONFIG will ensure consistent enabling and disabling of the pam
>> and systemd related
>> options for configure and the correct dependencies
>>
>> v2: fixed PACKAGECONFIG line continuation grammar
>> added _class-target for PACKAGECONFIG to work on target only
>> ...
>> +PACKAGECONFIG_class-target ??= "${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'pam',
>> 'pam', '', d)} \
>> + ${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES',
>> 'systemd', 'systemd', '', d)} "
>
> This does not work here. d.getVar('PACKAGECONFIG', True) evaluates to 'None'
> in the anonymous python function in base.bbclass so that non-systemd options
> are selected in systemd distributions and packaging fails in a sanity check.
>
> Using the less weak '?=' operator makes thing work as expected.
And a different version of this patch got merged:
https://github.com/openembedded/oe-core/commit/7cde7c639c53724327d981cbc0db5e123607de1c
Which has the following bug:
PACKAGECONFIG_class-target ??= "${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'pam',
'libpam', '', d)} \
[..]
PACKAGECONFIG[pam] = "--enable-su --enable-runuser,--disable-su
--disable-runuser, pam,"
It sets 'libpam' as PACKAGECONFIG option, but the option is actually named
'pam'. The patches posted to this list don't seem to have this bug.
regards,
Koen
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
