From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] Bumping packages: some comments/suggestions
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 09:09:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131014090904.1f20fcf4@skate> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <525B0AEF.9030406@trzebnica.net>
Dear Jerzy Grzegorek,
On Sun, 13 Oct 2013 23:04:47 +0200, Jerzy Grzegorek wrote:
>
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
>
> > Hello Jerzy and Axel,
> >
> > Recently, both of you have worked on and contributed a number of
> > patches bumping a significant number of Buildroot packages. This is of
> > course really great, and I'd like to thank you for those contributions.
> >
> > That being said, I would have two suggestions:
> >
> > *) It would be great if you could check that the reverse dependencies
> > of the package you're bumping still continue to build. For example,
> > Axel bumped 'ortp', but didn't realize bumping it would break
> > the linphone and mediastreamer. While we certainly cannot expect
> > contributors to test package bumps in all possible configurations
> > (especially for packages having a large number of
> > reverse dependencies), checking at least a few of them is a good
> > idea. Also, when bumping from one major release to another (such as
> > berkeleydb 5.x to berkeleydb 6.x), even more care should be taken.
> >
> > *) To make this "bumping" effort a bit more systematic, I believe it
> > would be useful to introduce an infrastructure in Buildroot to
> > automatically check if upstream has a new package. In many cases,
> > the upstream site has a directory with all the different versions
> > of the tarball, so checking if there's a newer one in an automated
> > way would be possible. If we do this for many packages, then we can
> > run a script every day, and check if there are new upstream
> > releases available. Debian has such a mechanism with the 'watch'
> > mechanism (see https://wiki.debian.org/debian/watch/). Gentoo has
> > the euscan utility (see https://github.com/iksaif/euscan). It would
> > be nice having something like this, that we could integrate in the
> > Buildroot per-package stats at
> > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/stats/ to get a clear vision of
> > which packages need to be upgraded. If one of you is interested in
> > doing this, it'd be great!
>
> Thanks for your suggestions.
> Do you mean something like this ?
>
> Package name Current version New upstream releases Reverse
> dependencies
> =======================================================================================
>
> ...
> apr ............... 1.4.6 ........................................
> apr-util log4cxx
> apr ..................................... 1.4.8
> apr-util .......... 1.4.1
> apr-util ................................ 1.5.1
> apr-util ................................ 1.5.2
I'm not sure listing all reverse dependencies will actually be useful
and/or possible. But yet, the idea is to add a mechanism that allows to
automatically check, for a given package, if there is a new upstream
version available.
Also, I believe there is no need to list multiple "new" upstream
releases (as you did for apr-util above), listing the latest one
available is fine.
Again, for now, the core of the problem is to be able to *detect* when
an upstream version is available for a given package. Once that is
done, we will see at integrating that into the statistics page I
mentioned earlier, and do all the automated execution.
Best regards,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-14 7:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-13 9:42 [Buildroot] Bumping packages: some comments/suggestions Thomas Petazzoni
2013-10-13 10:44 ` Axel Lin
2013-10-13 13:42 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-10-13 15:01 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2013-10-13 15:06 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-10-13 21:04 ` Jerzy Grzegorek
2013-10-14 7:09 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2013-10-14 7:40 ` Jeremy Rosen
2013-10-14 9:30 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-10-14 9:38 ` Jeremy Rosen
2013-10-14 10:02 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2013-10-14 10:04 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-10-14 12:58 ` arnaud aujon
2013-10-14 13:56 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-10-14 17:11 ` arnaud aujon
2013-10-14 21:55 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-10-15 7:34 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-10-15 19:55 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-10-14 13:45 ` rjbarnet at rockwellcollins.com
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=20131014090904.1f20fcf4@skate \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/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