Re: [PATCH] gnomebase: add GNOME_COMPRESS_TYPE variable

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 19:51 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 6 jun. 2012, om 17:38 heeft Saul Wold het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > On 06/06/2012 03:46 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> >> On 6 June 2012 06:34, Saul Wold<sgw@linux.intel.com>  wrote:
> >>> Upstream Gnome projects are starting to migrate to the .xz
> compress format,
> >>> so we need to add this to allow recipes to override the default
> of .bz2 as
> >>> the upstreams make the transition.
> >> 
> >> Considering all future tarballs are going to be .xz, would it make
> >> sense to default to .xz and fix the recipes where there isn't
> a .xz?
> >> 
> > I think until we get a predominant number of the gnome packages
> updated there is not much point in doing that as it would require
> extra recipe edits.  I think if we can do a batch update and then
> switch the default that would make more sense.  I will leave that up
> to the new gnome recipe maintainer Valentin.
>
> When are the gnome recipes going to move out of OE-core?

I keep seeing people mentioning their pet hates but nobody has put
together a reasonable proposal encompassing all the different elements
about how we could change the current set, thinking through the various
implications.

I will state once again for the record that we need enough in OE-Core
that we can build some working environments which are testable. I do not
want to end up in a position where we have a core which we can't
actually test. I also want the core to contain enough pieces to actually
be real world useful. I think the core today does that but if we start
pulling out every gnome piece or X11 then it would not be as real world
generally useful. I realise not everyone uses X11 but it does test a
significant set of the system, be it kernel framebuffer drivers, the
compiler etc.

I'm not thrilled to have sato there either but again, until we can come
up with a plan to replace it whilst still having a testable core, I
don't want to remove it.

Yes, I've said this before but since people keep asking the question,
I'll have to keep repeating myself.

Personally, I think there are bigger more pressing issues to deal with
too...

Cheers,

Richard