From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.windriver.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BE71E006C4 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 05:42:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s17DgPMk014436 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 7 Feb 2014 05:42:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.224.146.67] (128.224.146.67) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.347.0; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 05:42:24 -0800 Message-ID: <52F4E2BD.1030909@windriver.com> Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 08:42:21 -0500 From: Bruce Ashfield User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Dudau , Paul Eggleton References: <1391766483.4155.33.camel@sestows129.enea.se> <1688934.FUjqbafrUe@peggleto-mobl5.ger.corp.intel.com> <1391776291.4155.43.camel@sestows129.enea.se> In-Reply-To: <1391776291.4155.43.camel@sestows129.enea.se> Cc: "yocto@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: release branches and package upgrades X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 13:42:41 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 14-02-07 07:31 AM, Adrian Dudau wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On fre, 2014-02-07 at 10:28 +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: >> Hi Adrian, >> >> On Friday 07 February 2014 09:47:56 Adrian Dudau wrote: >>> I would like to understand Yocto Project's policy on the >>> release/maintenance branches (dora,dylan etc). My understanding was that >>> these were considered stable branches and only bugfixes and general >>> fixes that would not affect functionality were merged onto them. >>> >>> However, lately, we identified patches that upgrade package versions and >>> introduced some problems in our distro. We had a hard time identifying >>> the source of these problems, since we expected the maintenance branch >>> not to change in this way. >>> >>> Here are a couple of these patches as example in poky/dora branch: >>> 50574e41b882c3f2633f69486593eaea54d8e554 >>> 63335c87c1904287cdd5fd28d0ad6a73e985f2a4 >> >> Is that second revision correct? I don't see an upgrade of powertop to 2.5 on >> the dora branch. > > My bad. I mixed our branches up and thought that was introduced on dora > as well. It is not, you are right. > However, the lttng-modules version upgrade (commit > 50574e41b882c3f2633f69486593eaea54d8e554) that broke things still > stands. If that is the remaining example, the lttng-modules update was discussed on the mailing list, and since it fixed a deadlock in the 3.10.x kernel versions the new version was pulled in to fix the severe issue. see: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/2] lttng-modules: Update revision to grab last bugfix releases On the oe-core mailing list. What exactly broke in your case ? The build ? Bruce > >> >>> My question is: are patches like these normal and should we expect to >>> get version upgrades for packages on the maintenance branches as well? >> >> No, it is unusual to do recipe version upgrades in stable branches. For >> reference, here is a page I wrote on the wiki which describes how the stable >> branches should be managed: >> >> https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Stable_branch_maintenance > > Thank you for the link. It is good to know that this is not normal > procedure and that we can rely on the stability of the branch. It makes > sense to only merge critical fixes. Version upgrades can (and will) > break things. > >> >> Cheers, >> Paul >> > > _______________________________________________ > yocto mailing list > yocto@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto >