Re: [oe-commits] Tom Zanussi : lttng2-ust: rename to lttng-ust

[Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1380 bytes --]

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:02:41AM -0700, Chris Larson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > This is for the userspace tracing part, lttng-ust, which AFAIK doesn't
> > require any kernel patches.
> >
> 
> Yes, but the point was, as far as I know, the newer ust requires the newer
> kernel components, and the older requires the older kernel components, so
> technically the package upgrade on a device is likely to change the
> behavior.
> 
> I didn't say the current version required patches, the point was about the
> upgrade path for this recipe. I suspect we're one of the only companies
> that was actually using the old recipes, and we don't particularly care
> about the binary package upgrade paths at this time, but again, this is
> *not* a particularly smooth binary package upgrade path. I expect we're
> fine with that, but I wanted make sure it was an explicit conscious choice
> of behavior, not something unexpected.

From what you said it looks like recipe shouldn't be renamed in first
place.

I'm not interested in lttng, first I was commenting only about recipe
being renamed without RPROVIDES/RREPLEACES/RCONFLICTS combo and then I
was surprised to see that ERROR about version downgrade from
buildhistory.

Cheers,
-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]