kernel type naming and package version conflicts

kernel type naming and package version conflicts

[Darren Hart]

I believe I've identified why my preempt_rt kernel recipes are failing 
to build. The do_package_write_ipk is complaining about invalid 
characters in the file name - specifically:

kernel-2.6.34.7-rt-yocto-preempt_rt
*** Error: Package name  contains illegal characters, (other than 
[a-z0-9.+-])

Note the "_" in preempt_rt.

This name appears to be generated in part from the following assignment:

LINUX_KERNEL_TYPE = "preempt_rt"
LINUX_VERSION_EXTENSION ?= "-yocto-${LINUX_KERNEL_TYPE}"

Changing this to the following allows the build to succeed without error 
(replacing _ with -).
LINUX_VERSION_EXTENSION ?= "-yocto-preempt-rt"

As I see it we have two options, we can rewrite linux-yocto kernel 
branches for use in bitbake package names (replacing _ with -), or we 
can forbid the use of _ in the linux-yocto git branches. Rather than 
clutter up the recipes with string manipulators, I would prefer the 
latter option.

Bruce, Tom, do you have an opinion?


-- 
Darren Hart
Yocto Linux Kernel

Re: kernel type naming and package version conflicts

[Bruce Ashfield]

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> I believe I've identified why my preempt_rt kernel recipes are failing to
> build. The do_package_write_ipk is complaining about invalid characters in
> the file name - specifically:
>
> kernel-2.6.34.7-rt-yocto-preempt_rt
> *** Error: Package name  contains illegal characters, (other than
> [a-z0-9.+-])
>
> Note the "_" in preempt_rt.
>
> This name appears to be generated in part from the following assignment:
>
> LINUX_KERNEL_TYPE = "preempt_rt"
> LINUX_VERSION_EXTENSION ?= "-yocto-${LINUX_KERNEL_TYPE}"
>
> Changing this to the following allows the build to succeed without error
> (replacing _ with -).
> LINUX_VERSION_EXTENSION ?= "-yocto-preempt-rt"
>
> As I see it we have two options, we can rewrite linux-yocto kernel branches
> for use in bitbake package names (replacing _ with -), or we can forbid the
> use of _ in the linux-yocto git branches. Rather than clutter up the recipes
> with string manipulators, I would prefer the latter option.

Ah yes. The _ in preempt_rt pre-dates bitbake, but I'm not particularly
attached to it.

As for forbidding, I'll have to add sanity checks, since the branch names
are board customizable, and I know of plenty that will use _'s.

>
> Bruce, Tom, do you have an opinion?

I'll fix preempt_rt to be preempt-rt, and add sanity checks, but won't
go for full replacement.

How does that sound ?

Bruce

>
>
> --
> Darren Hart
> Yocto Linux Kernel
> _______________________________________________
> poky mailing list
> poky@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/poky
>



-- 
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
thee at its end"

Re: kernel type naming and package version conflicts

[Darren Hart]

On 12/14/2010 01:20 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Darren Hart<dvhart@linux.intel.com>  wrote:
>> I believe I've identified why my preempt_rt kernel recipes are failing to
>> build. The do_package_write_ipk is complaining about invalid characters in
>> the file name - specifically:
>>
>> kernel-2.6.34.7-rt-yocto-preempt_rt
>> *** Error: Package name  contains illegal characters, (other than
>> [a-z0-9.+-])
>>
>> Note the "_" in preempt_rt.
>>
>> This name appears to be generated in part from the following assignment:
>>
>> LINUX_KERNEL_TYPE = "preempt_rt"
>> LINUX_VERSION_EXTENSION ?= "-yocto-${LINUX_KERNEL_TYPE}"
>>
>> Changing this to the following allows the build to succeed without error
>> (replacing _ with -).
>> LINUX_VERSION_EXTENSION ?= "-yocto-preempt-rt"
>>
>> As I see it we have two options, we can rewrite linux-yocto kernel branches
>> for use in bitbake package names (replacing _ with -), or we can forbid the
>> use of _ in the linux-yocto git branches. Rather than clutter up the recipes
>> with string manipulators, I would prefer the latter option.
>
> Ah yes. The _ in preempt_rt pre-dates bitbake, but I'm not particularly
> attached to it.
>
> As for forbidding, I'll have to add sanity checks, since the branch names
> are board customizable, and I know of plenty that will use _'s.
>
>>
>> Bruce, Tom, do you have an opinion?
>
> I'll fix preempt_rt to be preempt-rt, and add sanity checks, but won't
> go for full replacement.
>
> How does that sound ?

Sounds sound ;-)

Thanks,

-- 
Darren Hart
Yocto Linux Kernel