From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from host4.kei.pl ([195.149.226.213] helo=smtp.host4.kei.pl) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OQy0o-0001rw-UV for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 22 Jun 2010 09:35:18 +0200 Received: (qmail 7974 invoked by uid 813007); 22 Jun 2010 07:30:33 -0000 X-clamdmail: clamdmail 0.18a Received: from 195.149.226.213 (HELO home.localnet) (marcin@juszkiewicz.com.pl@195.149.226.213) by 195.149.226.213 with ESMTPA; 22 Jun 2010 07:30:33 -0000 From: Marcin Juszkiewicz To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 09:30:28 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.35-4-generic; KDE/4.4.85; x86_64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201006220930.31306.marcin@juszkiewicz.com.pl> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 195.149.226.213 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: marcin@juszkiewicz.com.pl X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: [RFC] patch file location X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:35:19 -0000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dnia wtorek, 22 czerwca 2010 o 09:03:43 Frans Meulenbroeks napisa=C5=82(a): > I'd like to draw the attention to the location of patch files. > My original understanding was that these should be in either the files > dir (if they apply to all), or in a dir with the name of the recipe > (replacing the _ with a - ). > > And I kind-a assumed that if a patch is in a recipe dir it would have > priority above a version in the files dir. This is controlled by FILESPATHPKG and OVERRIDES. > Frankly speaking I have no clue at all which version of the patch will > be used by the 2.10.1 recipe.=20 glibc-2.4/ one - check FILESPATHPKG setting in glibc_2.10.1.bb recipe. > The only ways to find out is to study the class code that does the patch = or > to actually build the package (in the hope it selects the patch in a > deterministic way).=20 I did "grep FILES glibc/*" to find out. > I don't think it is good that if someone is debugging a problem that they > should have such a hard time to find out what version of a file is > actually used =20 > My proposal: > - only apply patches (seek for patches) in the recipe dir (e.g. in the > example for glibc_2.10.1.bb this would be glibc-2.10.1) and in the > files directory It is not only patches. It is everything in SRC_URI. And we have this=20 mechanism since beginning. =20 > (optionally we might allow for a mechanism that allows specifying > patches for higher level recipes; e.g. glibc_2.10.1 could look in > glibc-2.10.1, glibc-2.10, glibc-2, glibc and files). We have such mechanism already - it is FILESPATHPKG and related vars. =20 > How do people feel about this? Any implementation hints? Why implement when it is already implemented? Regards,=20 =2D-=20 JID: hrw@jabber.org Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz