Re: [meta-arago][master/scarthgap][PATCH] meta-arago-extras: v4l-utils: Add recipe for v1.28.1

[Yemike Abhilash Chandra <y-abhilashchandra@ti.com>]

Hi Ryan,

On 26/02/25 21:04, Ryan Eatmon wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2/16/2025 11:48 PM, Yemike Abhilash Chandra wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I have provided my response regarding the concerns raised.
>> Since I haven’t heard back, I wanted to check if you had
>> any further thoughts.
>>
>> Please let me know how you'd like to proceed.
> 
> One final question...  You said that this patch is for master as well, 
> but I'm seeing a collision between this and the same recipe from 
> meta-openembedded on master.  Should this patch be applied to master? Or 
> is the meta-openembedded version good enough?
> 

Yes, the master branch of meta-openembedded has the latest version.
Please skip this patch for the master branch. The meta-openembedded
version is good enough.

Thanks and Regards
Yemike Abhilash Chandra

> 
> 
>> Thanks and Regards,
>> Yemike Abhilash Chandra.
>>
>> On 12/02/25 13:46, Yemike Abhilash Chandra wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/02/25 02:21, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 01:28:13PM +0530, Yemike Abhilash Chandra 
>>>> via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
>>>>> An older recipe of v4l-utils (v1.26.1) is present in the meta-oe layer
>>>>> for scarthgap.
>>>>>
>>>>> TI's 6.12 based kernel has backported multistream routing APIs from
>>>>> upstream kernel, which requires v4l-utils to be the latest released
>>>>> version (v1.28.1).
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus we override the recipe in this layer to the latest release of
>>>>> v4l-utils.
>>>>
>>>> There are few issues with this...
>>>>
>>>> Do you really need to override the entire recipe? The old .bbappend was
>>>> applying a patch already - can you add a new patch to that and bump 
>>>> SRCREV?
>>>>
>>>
>>> We are not only updating the SRCREV, but also moving to a newer branch
>>> (stable-1.28), which is why we considered overriding the entire recipe.
>>> This approach aligns with how we have handled previously, including
>>> 6.1 timeline, where we followed a similar process.[1]
>>>
>>> Given that the original recipe package still references an older 
>>> version,
>>> do you suggest that we update the branch in the existing .bbappend,
>>> even though the base recipe remains on an older version?
>>>
>>> Please let me know if you want me to do that way.
>>>
>>> [1]: 
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230525104036.2050245-1-j-luthra@ti.com/
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Yemike Abhilash Chandra
>>>
>>>> If you do need to override the entire recipe, then you first need to 
>>>> clearly
>>>> articulate your reason in the commit log - wanting a newer commit 
>>>> isn't such
>>>> a reason
>>>>
>>>> Then you need to do it in 2 steps/patches - first you copy over the 
>>>> existing
>>>> recipe verbatim w/o any modifications, and in a separate step make your
>>>> modifications
>>>>
>>>> Also, having own copy of an upstream recipe requires special 
>>>> attention to not
>>>> violate the Yocto Project Compatible guidelines. I've explained this 
>>>> recently
>>>> in another thread here on the list
>>>>
>