preferred version not available

preferred version not available

[Detlef Vollmann]

Hello,

this one really drives me crazy.

Here's what I do:
$ bitbake -D -D -D -D -g linux-taurus | fgrep linux-taurus
DEBUG: Cache: /src/ccp-oe/taurus/recipes/linux/linux-taurus_githead.bb 
is not cached
DEBUG: BB /src/ccp-oe/taurus/recipes/linux/linux-taurus_githead.bb: 
handle(data)
DEBUG: LOAD /src/ccp-oe/taurus/recipes/linux/linux-taurus_githead.bb
DEBUG: CONF /src/ccp-oe/taurus/recipes/linux/linux-taurus_githead.bb:5: 
including recipes/linux/ccp-linux.inc
DEBUG: providers for linux-taurus are: ['linux-taurus']
NOTE: preferred version githead of linux-taurus not available (for item 
linux-taurus)

It already starts with the first 'DEBUG' line: Why is it not cached.
I have some other recipes for linux-taurus with version numbers that
don't get parsed again because they are cached.
But I can live with that.
What really drives me nuts is the last line: it clearly parsed
linux-taurus_githead.bb before, doesn't give me any error on it,
but then tells me 'preferred version githead of linux-taurus not
available'.  It's clearly there, so why is it not available?

The interesting thing is that I don't have any problems with my
other *_githead.bb recipes, only with the linux kernel...

I'd really appreciate any help!

   Detlef

Re: preferred version not available

[Detlef Vollmann]

On 07/18/11 21:16, Detlef Vollmann wrote:
> NOTE: preferred version githead of linux-taurus not available (for item
> linux-taurus)

> What really drives me nuts is the last line: it clearly parsed
> linux-taurus_githead.bb before, doesn't give me any error on it,
> but then tells me 'preferred version githead of linux-taurus not
> available'. It's clearly there, so why is it not available?
Ok, I found the problem: PREFERRED_VERSION refers to PV inside
the recipe, not to the part of the filename after '_'.
As I tinker with PV inside the recipe, bitbake is actually correct
that a PV 'githead' is not available for linux-taurus.

   Detlef

Re: preferred version not available

[Chris Larson]

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Detlef Vollmann <dv@vollmann.ch> wrote:
> On 07/18/11 21:16, Detlef Vollmann wrote:
>>
>> NOTE: preferred version githead of linux-taurus not available (for item
>> linux-taurus)
>
>> What really drives me nuts is the last line: it clearly parsed
>> linux-taurus_githead.bb before, doesn't give me any error on it,
>> but then tells me 'preferred version githead of linux-taurus not
>> available'. It's clearly there, so why is it not available?
>
> Ok, I found the problem: PREFERRED_VERSION refers to PV inside
> the recipe, not to the part of the filename after '_'.
> As I tinker with PV inside the recipe, bitbake is actually correct
> that a PV 'githead' is not available for linux-taurus.

All variables which are typically set by the filename can be
overridden. Those are simply defaults. See the definitions of PN, PV,
and PR in bitbake.conf.
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics

Re: preferred version not available

[Detlef Vollmann]

On 07/18/11 23:05, Chris Larson wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Detlef Vollmann<dv@vollmann.ch>  wrote:
>> Ok, I found the problem: PREFERRED_VERSION refers to PV inside
>> the recipe, not to the part of the filename after '_'.
>> As I tinker with PV inside the recipe, bitbake is actually correct
>> that a PV 'githead' is not available for linux-taurus.
>
> All variables which are typically set by the filename can be
> overridden. Those are simply defaults. See the definitions of PN, PV,
> and PR in bitbake.conf.
Yes, I knew that (I actually wrote the line changing the PV myself).
What surprised me (though it makes sense) that PREFERRED_VERSION
refers to PV, and not directly to a part of the filename.
It's probably still too much of 'make' history in my brain...

   Detlef

Re: preferred version not available

[Paul Eggleton]

On Tuesday 19 July 2011 08:20:00 Detlef Vollmann wrote:
> On 07/18/11 23:05, Chris Larson wrote:
> > All variables which are typically set by the filename can be
> > overridden. Those are simply defaults. See the definitions of PN, PV,
> > and PR in bitbake.conf.
> 
> Yes, I knew that (I actually wrote the line changing the PV myself).
> What surprised me (though it makes sense) that PREFERRED_VERSION
> refers to PV, and not directly to a part of the filename.
> It's probably still too much of 'make' history in my brain...

I wonder if it would make sense to add something to the error message that 
also lists the available versions? Then it would be a little more obvious what 
you need to set PREFERRED_VERSION to.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: preferred version not available

[Detlef Vollmann]

On 07/19/11 11:53, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 July 2011 08:20:00 Detlef Vollmann wrote:
>> On 07/18/11 23:05, Chris Larson wrote:
>>> All variables which are typically set by the filename can be
>>> overridden. Those are simply defaults. See the definitions of PN, PV,
>>> and PR in bitbake.conf.
>>
>> Yes, I knew that (I actually wrote the line changing the PV myself).
>> What surprised me (though it makes sense) that PREFERRED_VERSION
>> refers to PV, and not directly to a part of the filename.
>> It's probably still too much of 'make' history in my brain...
>
> I wonder if it would make sense to add something to the error message that
> also lists the available versions? Then it would be a little more obvious what
> you need to set PREFERRED_VERSION to.
That would be great.
And while we are in wishlist mode ;-) :
With a high enough debug level (I think 2), you'll get a list of
providers for a specific target.
To get also a list of versions for a specific package (PN), would
be really helpful.

   Detlef

Re: [oe] preferred version not available

[Detlef Vollmann]

[Resend to bitbake-devel due to new list address]
On 07/19/11 11:53, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 July 2011 08:20:00 Detlef Vollmann wrote:
>> On 07/18/11 23:05, Chris Larson wrote:
>>> All variables which are typically set by the filename can be
>>> overridden. Those are simply defaults. See the definitions of PN, PV,
>>> and PR in bitbake.conf.
>>
>> Yes, I knew that (I actually wrote the line changing the PV myself).
>> What surprised me (though it makes sense) that PREFERRED_VERSION
>> refers to PV, and not directly to a part of the filename.
>> It's probably still too much of 'make' history in my brain...
>
> I wonder if it would make sense to add something to the error message that
> also lists the available versions? Then it would be a little more obvious what
> you need to set PREFERRED_VERSION to.
That would be great.
And while we are in wishlist mode ;-) :
With a high enough debug level (I think 2), you'll get a list of
providers for a specific target.
To get also a list of versions for a specific package (PN), would
be really helpful.

   Detlef

Re: preferred version not available

[Chris Larson]

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 12:20 AM, Detlef Vollmann <dv@vollmann.ch> wrote:
> On 07/18/11 23:05, Chris Larson wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Detlef Vollmann<dv@vollmann.ch>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Ok, I found the problem: PREFERRED_VERSION refers to PV inside
>>> the recipe, not to the part of the filename after '_'.
>>> As I tinker with PV inside the recipe, bitbake is actually correct
>>> that a PV 'githead' is not available for linux-taurus.
>>
>> All variables which are typically set by the filename can be
>> overridden. Those are simply defaults. See the definitions of PN, PV,
>> and PR in bitbake.conf.
>
> Yes, I knew that (I actually wrote the line changing the PV myself).
> What surprised me (though it makes sense) that PREFERRED_VERSION
> refers to PV, and not directly to a part of the filename.

I'm not sure why that would be surprising. PN, PV, and PR are what are
used. The fact that they default to being based on the filename is
just an artifact of how oe does things. You could quite easily change
that, and make it required to set them all in the recipe. Bitbake does
*not* care about the filename, other than in determining what bbappend
to apply to the recipe when an append exists.
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics