From: Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com>
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Cc: Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>, Zhenfeng.Zhao@windriver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives
Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 10:47:31 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FC04443.1090708@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120525113057.GD3138@jama.jama.net>
On 05/25/2012 07:30 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>> Op 25 mei 2012, om 12:02 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> There is a bug if we:
>>> 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86
>>> 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay
>>>
>>> Then several pkgs in deploy/ipk/i586 would be installed to crownbay's
>>> image even if there is one in deploy/ipk/core2 and we have set the
>>> core2's priority higher than i586, when the version in deploy/ipk/i586 is
>>> higher. This doesn't work for us, for example, what the crownbay need is
>>> xserver-xorg-1.9.3, but it installs xserver-xorg-1.11.2.
>>>
>>> This is caused by opkg's selecting mechanism, if there are more than one
>>> candidates which have the same pkg name in the candidate list, for
>>> example, the same pkg with different versions, then it will use the last
>>> one which is the highest version in the list, this doesn't work for us,
>>> it should respect to the arch priorities in such a case.
>>
>> This is a serious break with the current opkg behaviour and I don't think it's an improvement. Needing different versions for non machine specific packages indicates a more serious bug elsewhere.
>
> It's not the same use-case as those 2 above, but what I don't like on
Hi Martin,
They are the same cases:-), I think that this patch has also fixed your problem,
the foo-1.0_armv7a will be kept now.
// Robert
> current opkg behaviour is that it doesn't "reinstall" the package with
> the same version when it gets available in arch with higher priority.
>
> e.g. I have armv7a device which has feed urls for armv4t and armv7a
> (armv7a of course with higher priority).
>
> foo-1.0 in both feeds armv4t armv7a
>
> opkg update&& opkg install foo -> foo-1.0_armv7a
>
> distro builder publish foo-1.0-r1 sofar only in armv4t feed
>
> opkg update&& opkg upgrade -> foo-1.0_armv7a is upgraded to foo-1.0-r1_armv4t)
>
> distro builder publish foo-1.0-r1 also to armv7a feed
>
> opkg update&& opkg upgrade -> nothing, but "upgrading" to foo-1.0-r1_armv7a) would be better
>
>
> On my distro builder I'm trying to prevent this scenario by rsyncing
> feeds only after build for *all* supported machines is completed, but
> that's still not really atomic operation. (And later I've also started
> to filter feeds which gets available on target image).
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-26 2:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-25 10:02 [PATCH 0/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives Robert Yang
2012-05-25 10:02 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Robert Yang
2012-05-25 11:19 ` Koen Kooi
2012-05-25 11:30 ` Martin Jansa
2012-05-25 14:09 ` Richard Purdie
2012-05-26 2:47 ` Robert Yang [this message]
2012-05-26 2:54 ` Robert Yang
2012-05-26 6:28 ` Martin Jansa
2012-05-26 8:07 ` Koen Kooi
2012-05-26 8:47 ` Robert Yang
2012-05-26 8:15 ` Robert Yang
2012-05-26 8:19 ` Martin Jansa
2012-05-26 8:35 ` Robert Yang
2012-05-26 8:42 ` Martin Jansa
2012-05-26 2:25 ` Robert Yang
2012-05-26 5:24 ` Robert Yang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-05-31 14:13 [PATCH 0/1] V2 " Robert Yang
2012-05-31 14:13 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Robert Yang
2012-05-31 15:01 ` Koen Kooi
2012-06-01 0:23 ` Robert Yang
2012-06-01 8:17 ` Richard Purdie
2012-06-01 9:04 ` Koen Kooi
2012-06-01 10:02 ` Richard Purdie
2012-06-01 10:35 ` Koen Kooi
2012-06-04 9:31 ` Robert Yang
2012-06-04 10:39 ` Martin Jansa
2012-06-04 14:38 ` Koen Kooi
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=4FC04443.1090708@windriver.com \
--to=liezhi.yang@windriver.com \
--cc=Zhenfeng.Zhao@windriver.com \
--cc=martin.jansa@gmail.com \
--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.