From: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Cc: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Layer priorities influencing default version selection
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 12:26:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201108021226.34560.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> (raw)
Hi all,
Andrea pointed out a situation where he has seen the layer priority overriding
version selection, and I've been able to confirm it.
Basically, if you have a recipe with a lower version in a layer with a higher
priority it selects the lower version. What's more after digging further I
found there were some rather anomalous interactions with the version logic and
BBCLASSEXTEND. Here's an example using Poky:
1. Firstly, copy meta/recipes-support/curl to meta-yocto/recipes-support, then
rename the version in meta-yocto so that its version is 7.20.0. At this point
both meta/ and meta-yocto/ have the same layer priority of 5.
2. "bitbake -s | grep ^curl" reports:
curl :7.21.7-r0
curl-native :7.21.7-r0
curl-nativesdk :7.21.7-r0
3. Now increase the layer priority in meta-yocto/conf/layer.conf to 6, and run
"bitbake -s | grep ^curl" again:
curl :7.20.0-r0
curl-native :7.21.7-r0
curl-nativesdk :7.21.7-r0
So the latest version here is a lie, this is not the latest version available.
Furthermore it seems not to have affected the BBCLASSEXTENDs.
4. Now add PREFERRED_VERSION_curl = "7.21.7" to conf/layer.conf and run
"bitbake -s | grep ^curl" again:
curl :7.20.0-r0 :7.21.7-r0
curl-native :7.21.7-r0
curl-nativesdk :7.21.7-r0
So it can clearly see the other recipe, it just doesn't acknowledge it until
you force the matter.
This is all rather undesirable behaviour IMHO - even if the BBCLASSEXTEND and
reported "latest version available" issues were corrected, I think the policy
of "latest version wins unless DEFAULT_PREFERENCE or PREFERRED_VERSION says
otherwise" should not be affected by layer priority.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Paul
(PS: this is not unique to Poky, Andrea and I first reproduced this with
Angstrom using bitbake master.)
--
Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
next reply other threads:[~2011-08-02 11:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-02 11:26 Paul Eggleton [this message]
2011-08-02 13:45 ` [OE-core] Layer priorities influencing default version selection Richard Purdie
2011-08-02 13:52 ` Phil Blundell
2011-08-02 14:14 ` Chris Larson
2011-08-02 14:21 ` Paul Eggleton
2011-08-02 14:27 ` Chris Larson
2011-08-02 14:51 ` Paul Eggleton
2011-08-02 14:55 ` Mark Hatle
2011-08-02 15:35 ` Khem Raj
2011-08-25 10:50 ` Paul Eggleton
2011-08-25 15:56 ` Khem Raj
2011-08-25 16:58 ` Paul Eggleton
2011-08-25 21:23 ` Martin Jansa
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=201108021226.34560.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com \
--to=paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox