[3/5] gnupg2: new package

Signed-off-by: Vicente Olivert Riera <Vincent.Riera@imgtec.com>
Reviewed-by: Markos Chandras <Markos.Chandras@imgtec.com>
---
 package/Config.in        |    1 +
 package/gnupg2/Config.in |   39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 package/gnupg2/gnupg2.mk |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 package/gnupg2/Config.in
 create mode 100644 package/gnupg2/gnupg2.mk

Vicente Olivert Riera
<Vincent.Riera@imgtec.com> wrote in
news:1402062269-57018-4-git-send-email-Vincent.Riera@imgtec.com: 

> +     select BR2_PACKAGE_PTH
> +     depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_USES_UCLIBC # pth

Hi,

afaik gnupg2 is compatible with uclibc if you use the existing libpthsem 
package instead of your new pth package.

Regards, Bernd

On 06/06/2014 03:33 PM, Bernd Kuhls wrote:
> Vicente Olivert Riera
> <Vincent.Riera@imgtec.com> wrote in
> news:1402062269-57018-4-git-send-email-Vincent.Riera@imgtec.com:
>
>> +     select BR2_PACKAGE_PTH
>> +     depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_USES_UCLIBC # pth
>
> Hi,

Hello Bernd, all,

> afaik gnupg2 is compatible with uclibc if you use the existing libpthsem
> package instead of your new pth package.

no, it doesn't build (as is) using libpthsem. Here is why:

First, because it looks for pth-config, which is installed by pth. 
libpthsem installs pthsem-config.

Second, although you try to make a pth-config symlink pointing to 
pthsem-config, it will fail again because "pthsem-config --version" 
outputs the version in a different format than pth-config, so the pth 
version check in gnupg2's configure script will fail.

Third, although you make a copy of pthsem-config calling it pth-config, 
and you modify it to output the version in the same way as the original 
pth-config does, it will fail again because it also looks for pth.h 
which is installed by pth. pthsem installs pthsem.h.

Now, if you make a pth.h symlink pointing to pthsem.h, then it builds fine.

To summarize: if you want to build gnupg2 using libpthsem instead of 
pth, you will need to patch libpthsem package to install a compatibility 
pth-config script (just a copy with the --version modification) and a 
compatibility pth.h symlink.

So, we have three options here and we need to decide one of them:

Option 1: add the new pth package
   pros: -there is no need to patch libpthsem
   cons: -gnupg2 will not work with uclibc

Option 2: patch the libpthsem package
   pros: -no need to add pth package
         -gnupg2 will work with uclibc
   cons: -we need to patch libpthsem to install compatibility stuff

Option 3: patch gnupg2 to use libpthsem in case of pth is missing
   pros: -no need to add pth package
         -gnupg2 will work with uclibc
         -gnupg2 will work with both libpthsem and pth
   cons: -patching gnupg2 source code should be accepted upstream

Let's vote! :)

> Regards, Bernd
>
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot@busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
>

Vincente, All,

On 2014-06-06 17:34 +0100, Vicente Olivert Riera spake thusly:
> On 06/06/2014 03:33 PM, Bernd Kuhls wrote:
> >afaik gnupg2 is compatible with uclibc if you use the existing libpthsem
> >package instead of your new pth package.
> 
> no, it doesn't build (as is) using libpthsem. Here is why:
[--SNIP--]
> So, we have three options here and we need to decide one of them:
> 
> Option 1: add the new pth package
>   pros: -there is no need to patch libpthsem
>   cons: -gnupg2 will not work with uclibc
> 
> Option 2: patch the libpthsem package
>   pros: -no need to add pth package
>         -gnupg2 will work with uclibc
>   cons: -we need to patch libpthsem to install compatibility stuff
> 
> Option 3: patch gnupg2 to use libpthsem in case of pth is missing
>   pros: -no need to add pth package
>         -gnupg2 will work with uclibc
>         -gnupg2 will work with both libpthsem and pth
>   cons: -patching gnupg2 source code should be accepted upstream

I think option 1 is the best for now.

If Bernd (or anyone else) is interested in making gnupg2 work on uClibc,
it will be possible for him to apply either option 2 or option 3 later
on. Adding support for uClibc can (and should) be done in a separate
patch, anyway.

And whatever the package we patch (pthsem or gnupg2 or both), the patch
should be submitted upstream, of course! ;-)

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

Dear Vicente Olivert Riera,

On Fri, 6 Jun 2014 17:34:53 +0100, Vicente Olivert Riera wrote:

> So, we have three options here and we need to decide one of them:
> 
> Option 1: add the new pth package
>    pros: -there is no need to patch libpthsem
>    cons: -gnupg2 will not work with uclibc
> 
> Option 2: patch the libpthsem package
>    pros: -no need to add pth package
>          -gnupg2 will work with uclibc
>    cons: -we need to patch libpthsem to install compatibility stuff
> 
> Option 3: patch gnupg2 to use libpthsem in case of pth is missing
>    pros: -no need to add pth package
>          -gnupg2 will work with uclibc
>          -gnupg2 will work with both libpthsem and pth
>    cons: -patching gnupg2 source code should be accepted upstream
> 
> Let's vote! :)

Option 4: use the --enable-compat option of pthsem, which was precisely
designed to offer compatibility with pth, by installing pth.h and
pth-config. The only issue was the version check in gnupg2 not
accepting the not-completely-compatible behavior of pth-config from
pthsem. A one byte patch in gnupg2 solved the problem.

Therefore, this patch (gnupg2) has been applied, after changing the
dependency from pth to pthsem, removing the !uclibc dependency, and
fixing minor formatting issues in the .mk file.

Thanks!

Thomas