From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LKGFK-0003p5-Qf for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:01:43 +0100 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LKG9U-0001GU-OQ for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:55:40 +0000 Received: from s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl ([85.145.118.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:55:40 +0000 Received: from k.kooi by s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:55:40 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:55:29 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87r63gseu6.fsf@neumann.lab.ossystems.com.br> <1231260477.5330.21.camel@dax.rpnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20081230 Shredder/3.0b2pre In-Reply-To: <1231260477.5330.21.camel@dax.rpnet.com> Sender: news Subject: Re: [RFC] bitbake git fetcher fix X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:01:45 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 06-01-09 17:47, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 16:41 +0100, Koen Kooi wrote: >> On 06-01-09 15:12, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I've found a issue when using current GIT fetcher and bellow patch >>> fixes it for me; could someone take a look at it and commit if it does >>> look fine? >>> + elif tag and tag != "1": >> That looks to be a hack for lazy people that don't specify a SRCREV nor >> set AUTOREV. Such a fetch failure is intended behaviour. > > How about we adopt Poky's slightly more verbose approach of SRCREV ?= > "INVALID" in bitbake.conf? > > We check for "INVALID" in bitbake and error if we see it. I like how it's more "in your face" about it :) regards, Koen