Problem with AUTOINC and ipk

Problem with AUTOINC and ipk

[Tino Breddin]

Hi there,

We are having problems with using AUTOINC together with the ipk package format. I'm not sure whether this issue applies to rpm and deb as well.

Given the following configuration in a recipe:

SRCREV = "AUTOINC"
PV = "git${SRCPV}"
PR = "r0"

The generated package will have a version like this:

git0+e6d1870200802f32e17e334272191397e15aec53-r0

In case the latest Git revision changes, the new package would have the version:

git0+30249a36b39482a98772c881334ee703715a54cc-r0

My understanding is that the first integer before the + is meant to be incremented monotonically to allow the package manager to figure out that a upgrade is available. Where is the state for this integer kept? Obviously if 2 developers build the package independent from each other it would always be 0 initially. But it will stay 0 for a single developer too if the package is cleaned first. At least that is what we are seeing.

I'd appreciate any feedback on how to handle recipes which should follow the Git HEAD.

Cheers,
Tino

Re: Problem with AUTOINC and ipk

[Martin Jansa]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1360 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 01:14:16PM +0200, Tino Breddin wrote:
> Hi there,
> 
> We are having problems with using AUTOINC together with the ipk package format. I'm not sure whether this issue applies to rpm and deb as well.
> 
> Given the following configuration in a recipe:
> 
> SRCREV = "AUTOINC"
> PV = "git${SRCPV}"
> PR = "r0"
> 
> The generated package will have a version like this:
> 
> git0+e6d1870200802f32e17e334272191397e15aec53-r0
> 
> In case the latest Git revision changes, the new package would have the version:
> 
> git0+30249a36b39482a98772c881334ee703715a54cc-r0
> 
> My understanding is that the first integer before the + is meant to be incremented monotonically to allow the package manager to figure out that a upgrade is available. Where is the state for this integer kept? Obviously if 2 developers build the package independent from each other it would always be 0 initially. But it will stay 0 for a single developer too if the package is cleaned first. At least that is what we are seeing.
> 
> I'd appreciate any feedback on how to handle recipes which should follow the Git HEAD.

Before PR service it was using bitbake's persistent cache in
PERSISTENT_DIR, now PR service is used for that:

https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/PR_Service

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]