RFC: extension of policy on removing recipes

RFC: extension of policy on removing recipes

[Robert Schuster]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 812 bytes --]

Hi,
the latest removal of the automake-native version just hit me today (I
am not building chinook-compat regularly and I am basically the only
person building it at all).

What I found surprising is, that automake 1.10 was deleted although it
was explicitly stated as PREFERRED_VERSION in the chinook-compat.conf. I
was under the impression that we already discussed that if you remove
something that is obviously being used, that patch is posted for RFC first.

?!?!?

Anyway I took the freedom to extend the respective wiki page[0] with
that policy. The text and the policy itself can be discussed.

(If no one answers, say within a week I remove 'DRAFT' from the page and
assume that it is accepted.)

Regards
Robert

[0] - http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Upgrading_Packages



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 268 bytes --]

Re: RFC: extension of policy on removing recipes

[Robert Schuster]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 376 bytes --]

Hi,
this is not directly related to the topic. I just want to demonstrate
what the removal of automake-native 1.10 causes here:

/bin/sh: /home/rob/oe/beagle/tmp/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/bin/mkdir: No
such file or directory

The problem is that there is no mkdir in STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE. :( No
idea, why automake thinks it must be there. Ideas?

Regards
Robert


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 268 bytes --]

Re: RFC: extension of policy on removing recipes

[Koen Kooi]

On 19-03-09 22:43, Robert Schuster wrote:
> Hi,
> this is not directly related to the topic. I just want to demonstrate
> what the removal of automake-native 1.10 causes here:
>
> /bin/sh: /home/rob/oe/beagle/tmp/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/bin/mkdir: No
> such file or directory
>
> The problem is that there is no mkdir in STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE. :( No
> idea, why automake thinks it must be there. Ideas?

It's an interaction between coreutils-native and the new automake. I 
have the exact same problem with angstrom. This problem shows exactly 
why we had weeks of testing when changing the automake version the last 
time (and that was only on a per distro basis!)


regards,

Koen

Re: RFC: extension of policy on removing recipes

[Koen Kooi]

On 19-03-09 22:36, Robert Schuster wrote:
> Hi,
> the latest removal of the automake-native version just hit me today (I
> am not building chinook-compat regularly and I am basically the only
> person building it at all).
>
> What I found surprising is, that automake 1.10 was deleted although it
> was explicitly stated as PREFERRED_VERSION in the chinook-compat.conf.

It also was in the angstrom config as PREFERRED_VERSION.

regards,

Koen

Re: RFC: extension of policy on removing recipes

[Mike (mwester)]

Robert Schuster wrote:
> Hi,
> the latest removal of the automake-native version just hit me today (I
> am not building chinook-compat regularly and I am basically the only
> person building it at all).

You're not at all alone on this.  It clobbered SlugOS as well.

The issue is that the autobuilders all built automake a looooooong time
ago, and until someone tries a build from an empty TMPDIR, this problem
won't be discovered.  There may be a few more folks who have yet to
discover that their builds will fail!

> What I found surprising is, that automake 1.10 was deleted although it
> was explicitly stated as PREFERRED_VERSION in the chinook-compat.conf. I
> was under the impression that we already discussed that if you remove
> something that is obviously being used, that patch is posted for RFC first.

Yep, agree.

Mike (mwester)