You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
How would you fix this?
The problem is that qr-code-generator builds all its libraries with the same name: qrcodegen (with no postfix).
Add a enable_c option and build either the c or c++ version
build the c++ library as qrcodegen++/qrcodegenpp`` and build both (c library as qrcodegen)
add a qr-code-generator-c recipe
Solution 1 does allow to have both the c and c++ in the build tree, because options are global.
Solution 2 requires patches to all dependencies.
Solution 3 is the easiest because it does not need any patches to any recipes needing the c version. Also it allows to combine the c and c++ versions without patching. The only downside is having to maintain an extra recipe.
What solution do you guys prefer? An alternative of which I didn't think of?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
madebr
changed the title
[question] qr-code-generator creating 2 libraries with same library
[question] qr-code-generator creating 2 libraries with same file name
Aug 27, 2020
Hello!
I have a package requiring qr-code-generator.
As you can see, it has both a c and c++ version.
The recipe on cci currently only packages the c++ version.
But I need the c version.
How would you fix this?
The problem is that qr-code-generator builds all its libraries with the same name:
qrcodegen
(with no postfix).enable_c
option and build either the c or c++ versionqrcodegen++/
qrcodegenpp`` and build both (c library asqrcodegen
)Solution 1 does allow to have both the c and c++ in the build tree, because options are global.
Solution 2 requires patches to all dependencies.
Solution 3 is the easiest because it does not need any patches to any recipes needing the c version. Also it allows to combine the c and c++ versions without patching. The only downside is having to maintain an extra recipe.
What solution do you guys prefer? An alternative of which I didn't think of?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: