- Append -osmo suffix to airspy and hackrf modules to avoid producing
identical binary names as airpsy and hackrf packages. In addition
add a conflict to avoid file conflicts.
I think we should just disable building of multiple modules from soapy-somo. Most soapysdr modules now have their own upstream repositories which that are developed outside of soapy osmo and we already have packages for those.
hardware:sdr/soapy-airspy
hardware:sdr/soapy-airspyhf
hardware:sdr/soapy-bladerf
hardware:sdr/soapy-hackrf
hardware:sdr/soapy-osmo
hardware:sdr/soapy-redpitaya
hardware:sdr/soapy-remote
hardware:sdr/soapy-rtlsdr
hardware:sdr/soapy-sdr
hardware:sdr/soapy-sdrplay
hardware:sdr/soapy-uhd
Support for the mentioned modules should be disabled in soapy-osmo.
- Append -osmo suffix to airspy and hackrf modules to avoid producing
identical binary names as airpsy and hackrf packages. In addition
add a conflict to avoid file conflicts.
I actually can't see any problems. Can you show me an example of such a conflict?
The following binaries are produced by two packages:
Based on package names I was assuming the namesake to be primary and this package to be secondary implementation.
For example:
Thanks - I can see what you mean.
I think we should just disable building of multiple modules from soapy-somo. Most soapysdr modules now have their own upstream repositories which that are developed outside of soapy osmo and we already have packages for those.
Support for the mentioned modules should be disabled in soapy-osmo.
I have prepared SR#601895
Sounds good. Thanks for providing the fix!