Re: [Ltib] Setting new package options and dependencies

[Stuart Hughes]

Hi Franz,

Thanks for the explanation.  What I would like is 2 things:

1. A unified diff (diff -u) of your LTIB changes against the current
Savannah CVS head (or as close to it as you can).  This will show me
changes and additions, I would expect:
   * modified pkg_map, packages.lkc
   * added libwebcam.spec file

2. Your patche(s) to libwebcam against some pristine release tarball/zip
etc.  All .spec files should be pristine baseline + patche(s)

The idea of the pristine+patches means that if a new release release of
libwebcam is made, someone else can "see" what you had to change to make
it cross compile.  If you can split out your changes to a set of
patches, 1 per topic change (e.g cross compile fixes, C99 fixes, etc)
that is even more helpful.

So please sent 1 & 2.  Also, can you send me a URL of where you got the
pristine tarball referenced in the .spec file.  This way you don't need
to send that, only your patches against it.

I think it may be worth sending 1 first and letting me see how it looks,
in case I see something that needs fixing.  This would save both of us time.

Regards, Stuart


Franz Trierweiler wrote:
> Hi Stuart,
> 
> Thanks for the explanation.
> 
> Just to be clear enough, let me tell you the whole story before I ask
> you a question (sorry to make assumptions once again before asking):
> The Logitech webcam-tools (libs and apps) are a "cmake"-style
> project, which is a pain to configure for cross compiling. Logitech
> chose this, mostly because that's convenient for native compilation
> (they can release the source for XCode, Visual Studio, Eclipse, and
> so on, cmake can prepare the accurate project files) which is 99% of
> use cases I think. After a few hours of setting and minor fixes (not
> ARM-dependant but C99 syntax unsupported by the toolchain) on the
> code, I finally got libs and apps cross-compiled and finished the
> installation by hand on my FS board. I then noticed that the lib
> crashed and found out on Logitech forums that the source code made
> assumptions on how data were aligned, and someone proposed a fix for
> ARM. I fixed the code and finally got something run fine. I then
> decided to prepare a RPM of this and made the decision of getting rid
> of cmake by preparing myself the Makefiles. Indeed, as explained
> above keeping a cmake style project would have been a pain. Thus, now
> we are there with a kind of libwebcam 1.0 for ARM.
> 
> I can prepare a diff which hilights ARM differences *only* and that
> would enable to have a generic base, patchable for any platform. Of
> course, we assume that the base project is the "traditional" (not
> cmake) project I have just prepared. Is-that what you really expect?
> Please confirm and I am ready to contribute of course.
> 
> Regards, Franz
> 
> Le 16 juin 2010 à 20:43, Stuart Hughes a écrit :
> 
>> Hi Franz,
>> 
>> The best thing to do is to submit a patch showing your changes, 
>> including the new .spec file, that way I can comment more
>> intelligently, including the pkg_map/packages.lkc issue (does your
>> package not show up if you run ./ltib -m config).
>> 
>> Also, you would not be on the hook to maintain this for all 
>> architectures.  If there's a chance that this package could be 
>> used/ported to other platforms, then the .spec file should be made
>> with that in mind (e.g. don't hardwire ARCH=arm, use the generic
>> way).  To avoid problems before this happens, you can put
>> conditions into the .spec file (my preference), such as:
>> 
>> 
>> case "$PLATFORM" in imx31ads) SOCKDRV=mx31ads-pcmcia ;; *) echo
>> "Error platform not supported" exit 1 ;; esac
>> 
>> See qtopia,spec/pcmciautils.spec for examples.
>> 
>> So far as putting in a particular grouping, do a find config | grep
>>  'something_in_this_group' and this should reveal the 
>> packages.lkc/pkg_map files that controls this.  The likely places
>> are: config/userspace/* and config/platform/*.  However, I would if
>> possible try to keep common.  Again, please send a complete patch
>> so I can 'see' what the situation is.
>> 
>> Regards, Stuart
>> 
>> Franz TRIERWEILER wrote:
>>> Hi Stuart,
>>> 
>>> My port of webcam-tools is finished. It includes slight
>>> modifications to support ARM specific data alignment. I turned it
>>> into a rpm package and the whole rpm process works fine: - prep -
>>> scbuild - scinstall - scdeploy
>>> 
>>> Since it is an ARM specific package (I cannot maintain it for
>>> several platforms since I only own i.MX25 Freescale 3-stack
>>> boards), I decided this would really become an ARM-specific
>>> package. I do not have the pretention of maintining it for all
>>> platforms supported by LTIB.
>>> 
>>> I have several questions regarding how to integrate it into LTIB.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Q1: I tried to get it included into my LTIB system to have it as
>>> a selectable package through the user interface. I modified
>>> packages.lkc as explained in the LTIB faq and added an entry in
>>> pkg_map. No way, I cannot see it it in the LTIB interface. Is
>>> there something I missed ?
>>> 
>>> Q2: I would like to specify that this package depends on: - ARM
>>> arch - V4Linux - UVC - udev
>>> 
>>> should be something like "depends xxxx & depends yyyy & depends
>>> zzzzz" but I am not sure.
>>> 
>>> In my LTIB, there is an iMX specific set of packages which are
>>> specific to the 3-stack evalbord. I think I should make my
>>> package appear in this group since it is ARM specific and tested
>>> only on iMX Freescale board.
>>> 
>>> How can I set this ?
>>> 
>>> Regards, Franz
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ LTIB home page:
>>> http://ltib.org
>>> 
>>> Ltib mailing list address@hidden 
>>> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ltib
> 
>