On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:20:58 +0000 "Zheng, Ruoqin" <zhengrq.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hi Andreas！ > Thank you for your description. > And what about samba-server? It's called "samba". If it's confusing, maybe adding a comment inside the recipe or to the package summary of "samba" might help. Regards, Andreas > > -------------------------------------------------- > Zheng Ruoqin > Nanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech. Co., Ltd.(FNST) > ADDR.: No.6 Wenzhu Road, Software Avenue, > Nanjing, 210012, China > MAIL : zhengrq.f...@cn.fujistu.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Andreas Oberritter [mailto:o...@opendreambox.org] > Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 7:14 PM > To: Zheng, Ruoqin/郑 若钦 <zhengrq.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> > Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCH] [meta-networking][PATCH] packagegroup-samba: new add > > Hi Zheng, > > On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 03:30:32 +0000 > "Zheng, Ruoqin" <zhengrq.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > 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? > > do it the same way you did here, but put it into samba_*.bb, i.e. add > ${PN}-client to PACKAGES and create RDEPENDS_${PN}-client. > > You may need to add ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}-client = "1", because the package won't > contain any files. > > Don't forget to remove samba-common. > > > > > 2. All samba libraries already depend on samba-common, so samba depends > > on it indirectly. Therefore this "package group" doesn't seem to be > > necessary. > > Yes, I found it, thank you. > > > > > + > > > +SUMMARY_${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? > > Put it nowhere. Installing packagegroup-samba-pidl is in no way easier than > installing samba-pidl directly. The summary doesn't add any value either. > > The same holds true for samba-ctdb-tests. > > Generally, package groups are meta packages that combine many packages from > different recipes. They don't make sense if they install only one package, > and they aren't necessary if all used packages come from exactly one recipe. > > Regards, > Andreas > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Zheng Ruoqin > > Nanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech. Co., Ltd.(FNST) > > ADDR.: No.6 Wenzhu Road, Software Avenue, > > Nanjing, 210012, China > > MAIL : zhengrq.f...@cn.fujistu.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org > > [mailto:openembedded-devel-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf > > Of Andreas Oberritter > > Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 9:29 PM > > To: openembedded-devel@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.f...@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.f...@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-sa > > > mb > > > a.bb > > > b/meta-networking/recipes-connectivity/packagegroups/packagegroup-sa > > > mb > > > a.bb > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..6177691 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/meta-networking/recipes-connectivity/packagegroups/packagegrou > > > +++ p- > > > +++ 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@lists.openembedded.org > > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
