From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15644C19F2E for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2025 16:05:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout4.zoneedit.com (mailout4.zoneedit.com [64.68.198.64]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.14316.1740672293846713706 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2025 08:04:54 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=none (message not signed); spf=pass (domain: denix.org, ip: 64.68.198.64, mailfrom: denis@denix.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout4.zoneedit.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8E5040C37; Thu, 27 Feb 2025 16:04:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout4.zoneedit.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zmo14-pco.easydns.vpn [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W6Vf2laKj4PZ; Thu, 27 Feb 2025 16:04:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.denix.org (pool-100-15-87-159.washdc.fios.verizon.net [100.15.87.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout4.zoneedit.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6A78B407E5; Thu, 27 Feb 2025 16:04:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.denix.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C69D21642B4; Thu, 27 Feb 2025 11:04:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 11:04:44 -0500 From: Denys Dmytriyenko To: Yemike Abhilash Chandra Cc: meta-arago@lists.yoctoproject.org, reatmon@ti.com, devarsht@ti.com, vaishnav.a@ti.com, u-kumar1@ti.com, r-donadkar@ti.com, a-limaye@ti.com Subject: Re: [meta-arago][master/scarthgap][PATCH] meta-arago-extras: v4l-utils: Add recipe for v1.28.1 Message-ID: <20250227160444.GI1879@denix.org> References: <20250211075813.970579-1-y-abhilashchandra@ti.com> <20250211205111.GU21608@denix.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2025 16:05:01 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-arago/message/15928 On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 01:46:48PM +0530, Yemike Abhilash Chandra wrote: > > > On 12/02/25 02:21, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 01:28:13PM +0530, Yemike Abhilash Chandra via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > >>An older recipe of v4l-utils (v1.26.1) is present in the meta-oe layer > >>for scarthgap. > >> > >>TI's 6.12 based kernel has backported multistream routing APIs from > >>upstream kernel, which requires v4l-utils to be the latest released > >>version (v1.28.1). > >> > >>Thus we override the recipe in this layer to the latest release of > >>v4l-utils. > > > >There are few issues with this... > > > >Do you really need to override the entire recipe? The old .bbappend was > >applying a patch already - can you add a new patch to that and bump SRCREV? > > > > We are not only updating the SRCREV, but also moving to a newer branch > (stable-1.28), which is why we considered overriding the entire recipe. > This approach aligns with how we have handled previously, including > 6.1 timeline, where we followed a similar process.[1] No, that's not the same - the previous change you linked in [1] also switched from git to a tarball release. Sure, that one could have been a .bbappend as well. You can also change the branch in SRC_URI with a Python .replace() function inside your .bbappend. > Given that the original recipe package still references an older version, > do you suggest that we update the branch in the existing .bbappend, > even though the base recipe remains on an older version? > > Please let me know if you want me to do that way. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230525104036.2050245-1-j-luthra@ti.com/ > > Thanks, > Yemike Abhilash Chandra > > >If you do need to override the entire recipe, then you first need to clearly > >articulate your reason in the commit log - wanting a newer commit isn't such > >a reason > > > >Then you need to do it in 2 steps/patches - first you copy over the existing > >recipe verbatim w/o any modifications, and in a separate step make your > >modifications > > > >Also, having own copy of an upstream recipe requires special attention to not > >violate the Yocto Project Compatible guidelines. I've explained this recently > >in another thread here on the list > >