[poky] [PATCH 0/6] Added rpm support in meta-toolchain

[Lu, Lianhao]

Hi Richard,

Richard Purdie wrote on 2011-01-28:
> Hi Lianhao,
> 
> On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 10:51 +0800, Lianhao Lu wrote:
>> From: Lianhao Lu <lianhao.lu at intel.com>
>> 
>> The purpose of this series of patches is to add rpm support in
>> meta-toolchain creation, and also to fix bug #227.
>> 
>> It makes the task populate_sdk in
>> meta/recipes-core/meta/meta-toolchain.bb more generic to support
>> installing packages from ipk, rpm, and deb files in creating
>> meta-toolchain
> tarball, and move the populate_sdk task out of meta-toolchain.bb
> recipe into a bbclass.
>> 
>> It added populate_sdk_xxx.bbclass for different package file format.
>> 
>> The meta-toolchain installing process involes 2 set of packages, one
>> is the host sdk set which contains packages of applications(e.g.
>> cross-canadian compilers, qemu, etc.) and relevant run-time
>> libraries, the other is the target sdk set which contains packages
>> of target arch's libraries and header files to create a target
>> rootfs for cross compiling purpose.So the patches also modifes
>> and/or adds functions in package_deb.bbclass & package_rpm.bbclass
>> to update the package index
> and to generate different installing configuration files for the tow
> different sets.
>> 
>> It also fixed a bug in cross-canadian.bbclass to enable the
>> package_deb.bbclass generate correct deb package files for
>> cross-canadian
> recipies.
> 
> Its great to see this but I think we need to restructure the code a
> little more aggressively and create some general functions to complete this properly.
> 
> What I mean is that both rootfs_ipk and populate_sdk_ipk share code,
> rootfs_deb and populate_sdk_deb share code and likewise for rpm.
> 
> What we need is a generic function where we specify where the target
> directory is and a list of packages we want to install along with some
> architecture information and it then goes and does it. Those functions
> would like in package_xxx.bbclass. We should do similar things well in
> one place rather than in two with slightly different implementations.
> 
> Do you agree?
> 
Ok, I'll merge the common part between rootfs_XXX and populate_sdk_XXX into package_XXX.

Best Regards,
Lianhao