From: Saul Wold <sgw@linux.intel.com>
To: Xiaofeng Yan <xiaofeng.yan@windriver.com>
Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [oe] Source Archiver Class
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 08:57:48 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F43CD0C.8050700@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F41EAD7.3030009@windriver.com>
On 02/19/2012 10:40 PM, Xiaofeng Yan wrote:
> On 2012年02月18日 07:52, Saul Wold wrote:
>>
>> Xiaofeng & Community:
>>
>> We had a chat with Chris Larson and Mark Hatle here at ELC.
>>
>> We focused this issue down to a fewer number of options that meet the
>> needs of the licenses. Please review this and let us know if there are
>> any issues or concerns.
>>
>>
> Hi Saul,
>
> I comment my understanding as follow:
>> Best Practices:
>> - Archive during build, we do not support nor recommend post archiving
>> - Original tarball and patches w/ordering file (maybe comment the
>> series), grab non-patch files also.
> for example:
> file://a.patch
> file://b.config.in
> we also archive b.config.in.
Yes, correct.
>> - Unless requesting configured sources, which will just be the
>> configured source tarball
>> - Grab temp as postfunc of do_package - latest logs via links & pid
>>
> That means logs package include all of logs in temp. for example.
> You has described a following function we will realize at the previous
> email.
> 3 - Original Source code & Patches & temp (scripts & logs)
>
> source codes and patches should be in the stage do_patch[postfunc] = "
> do_get_source"
> logs should be in the stage do_package[postfunc] = " do_get_logs"
> So logs file shouldn't be archived in do_patch[postfunc] = " do_get_logs"
> The logs in the stage of do_packge are more than do_patch.
>
Correct, you want to get the logs and scripts from temp when they are
most complete (after do_package not after do_patch).
As mentioned below, you would use the variable SOURCE_ARCHIVE_LOG in the
do_package[postfunc] to determine if you need to archive the logs or not.
>> For sstate Builds (LATER):
>> - need to verify that fetch/patch/configure will get re-run for archiving
>> - Add temp dir to sstate capture (without links)
>>
>> 3 Implementations classes
>> - Filter in oe/lib/license.py
>> - source_archive.bb
>> - archives tarballs to ${BP}/...
>> - reuse copyleft_compliance for patch handling
>> - srpm
>> - take output from above and create SRPM - (LATER)
>>
> We will do the archive work according the license . I will implement two
> functions, one is for left, the other for right.
I am not sure what you mean by one is for left and the other is for right?
Can you explain your thoughts here.
>> 2 Configuration classes
>> - uses prefunc/postfunc at correct place
>> - Original Tarball / Patches
>> - Post Configuration
>>
> We can define 8 classes to complete 8 kinds of archiving methods. every
> class will inherit archiver.bbclass.
I am not sure we need 8 classes anymore, that was the point of this
email to simplify the needs.
2 Classes:
source_patches.bbclass
- Original Tarball & Patches & Other files
- do_patch[postfunc] = <archive ${S}/patches with Original tarball>
- Included temp dir if enabled via SOURCE_ARCHIVE_LOG
configured_source.bbclass
- Get the ${S} dir (or $S & any build dir) after do_configure
- do_configure[postfunc] = <archive configured source>
- Include temp dir if enabled via SOURCE_ARCHIVE_LOG
> and then realize do_stage[prefunc/postfunc] in this class.
> stage include unpack, patch, configure, build package and so on.
> for example. we want only to get original tarball, then we can define a
> bbclass named "source.bbclass"
> source.bbclass:
> inherit archiver.bbclass
> do_unpack[postfunc] = " do_get_source"
>
> if we want to get both original and patches tarball, then we can define
> bbclass names "source_patches.bbclass"
> source_patches.bbclass
> inherit archiver.bbclass
> do_unpack[postfunc] = " do_get_source_patches"
>
>> SOURCE_ARCHIVE_PACKAGE_TYPE = {tar, srpm}
>> SOURCE_ARCHIVE_LOG = {True, False}
>>
>> Please let us know if you have any questions.
>>
>> Sau!
>>
> If my understanding don't meet your ideas, Please correct me.
>
I should be available via IRC in your afternoon, I will be away during
your morning.
Sau!
> Thanks for your help very much.
>
> Thanks
> Yan
>> On 02/15/2012 05:19 PM, Xiaofeng Yan wrote:
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-21 17:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-26 20:56 Source Archiver Class Saul Wold
[not found] ` <4F24F672.5090107@linux.intel.com>
2012-02-13 10:41 ` [oe] " Xiaofeng Yan
2012-02-14 16:51 ` Saul Wold
2012-02-15 15:23 ` Saul Wold
2012-02-16 1:19 ` Xiaofeng Yan
2012-02-17 23:52 ` Saul Wold
2012-02-20 6:40 ` Xiaofeng Yan
2012-02-21 16:57 ` Saul Wold [this message]
2012-02-23 2:24 ` Xiaofeng Yan
2012-02-23 2:41 ` Chris Larson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F43CD0C.8050700@linux.intel.com \
--to=sgw@linux.intel.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
--cc=xiaofeng.yan@windriver.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.