Re: [cip-dev][isar-cip-core][PATCH v2] Add missing MACHINE to install swupdate-config*

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>]

On 26.06.26 20:28, Quirin Gylstorff wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/26/26 7:13 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 26.06.26 18:33, Quirin Gylstorff wrote:
>>> From: Quirin Gylstorff <quirin.gylstorff@siemens.com>
>>>
>>> This fixes an issue when building swupdate-config* for two different
>>> architectures, for example arm64 and riscv64.
>>>
>>> The reason is that both package are ARCH all and provide the virtual
>>> package `swupdate-config` which leads to the following error during
>>> installation in the rootfs with Debian sid:
>>>
>>> | Building dependency tree...
>>> | Reading state information...
>>> | Package swupdate-config is a virtual package provided by:
>>> |   swupdate-config-qemu-riscv64 0.2
>>> |   swupdate-config-qemu-arm64 0.2
>>> |
>>> | E: Package 'swupdate-config' has no installation candidate
>>>
>>> To be compliant with the Debian standard the conflict field is missing.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Quirin Gylstorff <quirin.gylstorff@siemens.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> v1 was 'swupdate-config: Set DPKG_ARCH to any'
>>>
>>> Changes v2:
>>>   - set explict recipe name in image creation
>>>   - remove DPKG_ARCH setting in swupdate-config
>>>
>>>   recipes-core/images/swupdate.inc | 4 ++--
>>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/recipes-core/images/swupdate.inc b/recipes-core/images/
>>> swupdate.inc
>>> index 00e972e..006d622 100644
>>> --- a/recipes-core/images/swupdate.inc
>>> +++ b/recipes-core/images/swupdate.inc
>>> @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ IMAGE_PREINSTALL:append = "${@'' if
>>> bb.utils.to_boolean(d.getVar('SWUPDATE_SELFB
>>>     WFX_URL ??= ""
>>>   # check for wfx url to enable support for wfx backend based updates
>>> -IMAGE_INSTALL:append = "${@' swupdate-config-wfx' if
>>> d.getVar("WFX_URL") else ''}"
>>> +IMAGE_INSTALL:append = "${@' swupdate-config-wfx-' +
>>> d.getVar("MACHINE") if d.getVar("WFX_URL") else ''}"
>>>     IMAGE_INSTALL += " swupdate-handler-roundrobin"
>>> -IMAGE_INSTALL += " swupdate-config"
>>> +IMAGE_INSTALL += " swupdate-config-${MACHINE}"
>>
>> Shouldn't we then also retire the virtual packages?
>>
> This could break downstream. Also I currently have no better solution than:
> 
> +DEBIAN_PROVIDES:remove="swupdate-config-wfx"
> +PROVIDES:remove="swupdate-config-wfx"
> +RPROVIDES:remove="swupdate-config-wfx"
> 

I agree that it may break downstream, and we shouldn't no longer do that
late in the RC cycle. But we should do that for one of the next
releases. We could start by warning in the next release if the
machine-less version of the recipe is pulled by any recipe.

For this release, I've now merged the patch as-is.

Thanks,
Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Foundational Technologies
Linux Expert Center