From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RGqmv-0001Gy-FU for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:27:53 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p9KBM2CU016712 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 12:22:02 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 15317-09 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 12:21:57 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p9KBCBnw016618 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 12:21:56 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 12:21:55 +0100 In-Reply-To: <67E90C92-F94E-4FF2-ADA5-A5295C4F1279@dominion.thruhere.net> References: <1316297897-698-1-git-send-email-dbaryshkov@gmail.com> <1316297897-698-2-git-send-email-dbaryshkov@gmail.com> <0E901391-C9FC-48AE-88A4-C1064E57376E@dominion.thruhere.net> <1317221697.12332.13.camel@ted> <89CD0BCB-1457-4C76-87BA-5ED03454C343@dominion.thruhere.net> <1317239461.12332.55.camel@ted> <67E90C92-F94E-4FF2-ADA5-A5295C4F1279@dominion.thruhere.net> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.1.91- Message-ID: <1319109715.16061.4.camel@ted> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] kernel.bbclass: respect MACHINE_KERNEL_PR X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 11:27:53 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 08:23 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > Op 28 sep. 2011, om 22:04 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven: > > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 16:50, Richard Purdie > > wrote: > >>> This patch improves the current situation and I don't foresee the > >>> autoPR code working soon > >> > >> Which is why we need to switch to that model and shake out the issues > >> sooner than later. Enough is enough with the PR madness and we need to > >> get to grips and fix it. > > > > I fully agree this is the way to go but this doesn't mean we ought to > > hold this patch until all this happens. This patch allows the removal > > of the kernel.bbclass from meta-oe so reducing the delta between > > oe-core and meta-oe. > > So a month later and no sign of the mythical working > auto-PR-incrementer or work on it. A month where we were stabilising for a release. Its on the 1.2 feature list and as it happens I've been hearing questions about what is needed here. > So can this patch go in? It would mean we can drop kernel.bbclass > from meta-oe. I *HATE* this PR bumping stuff. I've just been told we likely need to bump the PR for anything using libGL which once again shows that build system basically failing to automate building things. So I'm drawing a line here and no, we can't take this. If its fine to expect people to bump PR values manually for lib* changes, its fine for kernels too. I'd suggest you do drop this from meta-oe and we start building up pressure for the problem to get fixed properly rather than letting people wallpaper over the cracks. Cheers, Richard