From: Andreas Oberritter <obi@opendreambox.org>
To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: bug in recipe version priorities across layers?
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:54:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F466F3D.8060504@opendreambox.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120223140409.GT3769@jama.jama.net>
On 23.02.2012 15:04, Martin Jansa wrote:
> Afaik latest version from layer with highest priority wins. Which
> doesn't always mean latest version globally.
>
> DEFAULT_PREFERENCE doesn't help e.g. to demote development version in some
> layer with higher priority.
>
> But PREFERRED_VERSION does work.
Thanks, Martin! I didn't expect that, but it's an explanation. Is this
documented somewhere? I think OE-classic behaved differently.
I noticed that "bitbake-layers show-overlayed" nicely prints the
available versions in order of preference. For some packages, I don't
understand the ordering though, e.g.:
python-setuptools:
meta-oe 0.6c11-ml3
meta 0.6c11-ml3
python-setuptools-native:
meta 0.6c11-ml3
meta-oe 0.6c11-ml3
(I modified bitbake-layers to include PR in its output)
The diff between both layers looks like this:
--- openembedded-core/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python-setuptools_0.6c11.bb 2012-01-18 15:05:39.876945863 +0100
+++ meta-openembedded/meta-oe/recipes-devtools/python/python-setuptools_0.6c11.bb 2012-01-18 15:10:23.816943155 +0100
@@ -29,3 +29,5 @@
SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "630fea9b726320b73ee3ca6ff61732cb32675b0389be658080fe46383b87a1d3"
BBCLASSEXTEND = "native"
+
+NATIVE_INSTALL_WORKS = "1"
---
The only occurence of python-setuptools(-native) is:
meta/classes/setuptools.bbclass:DEPENDS += "python-setuptools-native"
Another strange one, this time with unequal versions:
mpfr:
meta-oe 3.0.0-r4
meta 3.1.0-r0
mpfr-native:
meta 3.1.0-r0
meta-oe 3.0.0-r4
Would lowering the priority of meta-openembedded affect its ability to
bbappend OE-core's recipes? Is it possible to lower its priority, or to
raise the priority of OE core, without modifying conf/layer.conf in
either layer?
Regards,
Andreas
>> - The older wpa-supplicant is provided for a different machine.
>> - Both bitbake and openembedded-core are from today's master branches.
>>
>> The problem: The machine I'm building for also picks up version 0.5.10,
>> unless I eiher copy 0.7.3 from openembedded-core to my layer or delete
>> version 0.5.10 from my layer. Deleting wpa-supplicant_0.7.3.bbappend
>> doesn't change the behaviour.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-23 17:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-23 13:57 bug in recipe version priorities across layers? Andreas Oberritter
2012-02-23 14:04 ` Martin Jansa
2012-02-23 16:54 ` Andreas Oberritter [this message]
2012-02-23 21:01 ` Martin Jansa
2012-02-23 22:23 ` Chris Larson
2012-02-24 10:33 ` Martin Jansa
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=4F466F3D.8060504@opendreambox.org \
--to=obi@opendreambox.org \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/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.