From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id E8892E00994; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 08:26:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -5.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, high * trust * [156.147.23.52 listed in list.dnswl.org] * 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Greylist: delayed 1800 seconds by postgrey-1.32 at yocto-www; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 08:26:45 PDT Received: from lgeamrelo11.lge.com (lgeamrelo12.lge.com [156.147.23.52]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D6FDE0096F for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 08:26:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown (HELO lgeamrelo01.lge.com) (156.147.1.125) by 156.147.23.52 with ESMTP; 13 Sep 2019 23:56:43 +0900 X-Original-SENDERIP: 156.147.1.125 X-Original-MAILFROM: keith.derrick@lge.com Received: from unknown (HELO LGSVL-EXC02.lgsvl.net) (10.195.253.63) by 156.147.1.125 with ESMTP; 13 Sep 2019 23:56:42 +0900 X-Original-SENDERIP: 10.195.253.63 X-Original-MAILFROM: keith.derrick@lge.com Received: from LGSVL-EXC02.lgsvl.net (10.195.253.63) by LGSVL-EXC02.lgsvl.net (10.195.253.63) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1044.25; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 07:56:42 -0700 Received: from LGSVL-EXC02.lgsvl.net ([10.195.253.63]) by LGSVL-EXC02.lgsvl.net ([10.195.253.63]) with mapi id 15.00.1044.021; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 07:56:42 -0700 From: keith.derrick To: "yocto@yoctoproject.org" Thread-Topic: Alternative to _git.bb convention for unstable versions? Thread-Index: AQHVakHEPVyhoriL40q6eAs8vD4B5w== Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2019 14:56:41 +0000 Message-ID: <1568386601901.43131@lge.com> Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.195.247.37] MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Alternative to _git.bb convention for unstable versions? X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2019 15:26:48 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_156838660190143131lgecom_" --_000_156838660190143131lgecom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am currently creating a new layer (which will eventually be made generall= y available). I need to provide both a versioned recipe, and an "unstable" = one. Currently I have somepackage_1.0.bb and somepackage_git.bb which are workin= g fine. However, using the "_git" approach (with DEFAULT_PREFERENCE =3D "-1") requi= res the use of PREFERRED_VERSION in either local.conf or a distro.conf. I'v= e tried putting it in the image files, and that doesn't work. If you are not creating your own DISTRO, and instead just adding the layer = to a straight poky/meta build, you seem to be pretty much stuck with adding= 3 PREFERRED_VERSION statements (target, -native, and nativesdk- variants) = to local.conf. I'd rather not require that of users of the layer. I'm considering instead using either "somepackage-unstable.bb" or "somepack= age-devel.bb" instead of "sompackage_git.bb". This allows a simple selectio= n of either RDEPENDS =3D "somepackage" or RDEPENDS =3D "somepackage-devel"= to add the desired one to an image. However, neither "-devel" or "-unstable" have the right feel for the suffix= . If, for example, you are picking up an older commit (between versions sa= y) it might well be completely stable. Does the community have a naming convention for this type of recipe? Failin= g that, is there somewhere else in the met-data the PREFERRED_VERSION state= ment can go other than a configuration file? Thanks Keith Derrick --_000_156838660190143131lgecom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am currently creating a new layer (which will eventually be = made generally available). I need to provide both a versioned recipe, and a= n "unstable"  one.


Currently I have somepackage_1.0.bb and somepackage_git.bb which are wor= king fine.


However, using the "_git" approach (with DEFAULT_PREFERENCE = =3D "-1") requires the use of PREFERRED_VERSION in either local.c= onf or a distro.conf. I've tried putting it in the image files, and th= at doesn't work.


If you are not creating your own DISTRO, and instead just adding the lay= er to a straight poky/meta build, you seem to be pretty much stuc= k with adding 3 PREFERRED_VERSION statements (target, -native, and nativesd= k- variants) to local.conf. I'd rather not require that of users of the layer.


I'm considering instead using either "somepackage-unstable.bb"= or "somepackage-devel.bb" instead of "sompackage_git.bb&quo= t;. This allows a simple selection of either  RDEPENDS =3D "somepackage" or RDEPENDS =3D "so= mepackage-devel" to add the desired one to an image.


However, neither "-devel" or "-unstable" have the ri= ght feel for the suffix. If, for example, you are picking up an older commi= t (between versions  say) it might well be completely stable.


Does the community have a naming convention for this type of recipe? Fai= ling that, is there somewhere else in the met-data the PREFERRED_VERSION st= atement can go other than a configuration file?


Thanks

Keith Derrick


--_000_156838660190143131lgecom_--