From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [143.182.124.37]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 031DBE0027F for ; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 11:34:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from azsmga001.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.19]) by azsmga102.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Sep 2012 11:34:19 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,503,1344236400"; d="scan'208";a="198470760" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.122.5]) by azsmga001.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Sep 2012 11:34:18 -0700 From: Paul Eggleton To: Rudolf Streif Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 19:34:16 +0100 Message-ID: <31384487.oKEco2inpj@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.9.1 (Linux/3.2.0-31-generic-pae; KDE/4.9.1; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <41DEA4B02DBDEF40A0F3B6D0DDB1237946A720D0@FMSMSX151.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: The term Package as used in the YP docs X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 18:34:20 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Friday 28 September 2012 11:27:37 Rudolf Streif wrote: > +1 > > I agree with Scott's definition. In the general Linux context a Package is > a compilation of binaries, documentation, development files, etc. wrapped > up in a format that can be used by a package management system to install > it on a target system. No dispute there. > It is somewhat confusing that YP and OE use the term 'package' synonymously > with 'recipe'. In most cases a package is the output of a recipe. The thing is, we no longer do that - we've fixed a number of references in the documentation, help text and error messages for this release so that "recipe" is used when that's what we mean. If we've left any references that should be considered a bug. > Unfortunately, changing variables like P, PN, PV, PR etc. > may cause some pain. If a transition is what the broader community would > like to achieve then a period where old and new variables can be used > interchangeably (if possible) would be the way to go. I'm not sure there's a huge amount to be gained by doing this when weighed against the cost - it would certainly cause a massive amount of churn, with the potential for problems with layer interaction where one layer has done the big rename and another that bbappends recipes in the first hasn't. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre