Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf: rename perf_3.4 to perf

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

On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 16:54 -0700, Saul Wold wrote:
> On 03/07/2013 04:39 PM, tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com wrote:
> > From: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com>
> >
> > There's nothing kernel-version-specific about the perf_3.4 recipe, so
> > it's actually misnamed and misleading now that it also gets used with
> > the 3.8 kernel.
> >
> > Since the recipe isn't tied to a specific PV, and simply uses
> > whatever's in STAGING_KERNEL_DIR, there's no reason to add anything
> > else either to the bare PN, so just use that as the recipe name.
> >
> This did not quite work out correctly, since the package name has now 
> gone backwards since the default PV for a recipe is 1.0 when nothing is 
> set on the recipe file name.
> 
> Is there a way to sort this out such that it picks up an incrementing PV 
> from the kernel recipe?
> 
> As it stands now, the PV has gone from 3.4 -> 1.0.
> 
> Thanks for looking after this.

As a hint on how to do this we need to read the kernel version and then
set PKGV just prior to or at the start of do_package time.

The logs will show 1.0 as the version but the final packages will have
the kernel version.

Cheers,

Richard