From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.stusta.mhn.de (mail.stusta.mhn.de [141.84.69.5]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 971816055F for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 21:58:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.stusta.mhn.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48VxxT38jlz4Y; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 22:58:53 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stusta.de; s=default; t=1583099933; bh=/QCM5TqfZuBiBm66F86XsRNjMtWp/SESAV6GO/D57SI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=pQO6Th4iIqGo3SuGQfSGHAvqsLRk5Y2hdxfRic2qTM+FDvj831waQJ02Mc8F1O5AP 4ELW1vhDR6VYfvauPGXM1c5cyWRFwt5AP/nxVd3bTI+OBXoOPR87OHqB+DOc5cRDje jMXyYe8UQ0jOaXr+CJoEZB+/vyVusVWji0LM7xuTUelQxGrDA9RuHrrtgUh2ztG9Uf iGRs4YFDKBsMgowaMbwZLFzfBHFjh7bZGXebU9eDJIq5893kzmpjdvCjV4KVdv5800 Qzier8d5EGX8So6+ApZh2spc5nxmUF3Jgg8c2uf+e4AruE1WK7C0sVLlqUyx8Zf7xb 1hLJtESxRQyYPpyyOGzPTxR+5rBRGV1KGhMhTdO6aUDO5UXTm26LCm///nj+EGvHB2 Ghksmvl4JNw7zmoXS2k0J/UBDCWNx2Cc82sZmqKc6P69l62KFHSfWgcb1WlLCnSvAd V+vXtwTtQLnaE5J7g7zL3ZKtXM5+OHpiVblRetgGN/R2yKpHdPFsIsf/adona8QRjt wKPoNvcC5n++5p4pc93OjdRLwvdoaq22kGL/27qxIm1uy57UxOIFjSzvBbW+SlvhJB tG9wZ7D1supbCc6F0d7hhsddB2WDKEQaighUGH4EfqPv7b6z57HeYIi6UWi/zTR/Sc 6+PTH3KkV/3fhTU3eyP7sww8= Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2020 23:58:51 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: "Robert P. J. Day" Message-ID: <20200301215851.GA15475@localhost> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Cc: OE Core mailing list Subject: Re: best practises: how to properly "steal" recipes from a newer layer? X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2020 21:58:55 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline On Sun, Mar 01, 2020 at 03:29:35PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >... > 1) writing the recipe from scratch, compatible with morty, or > 2) flat-out stealing that recipe from a *newer* layer, as long as > it was compatible (this was done frequently) >... > if i just blindly copy the recipe file forward, i'm going to have to > go through this all again at the next migration. is there a reasonable > way to add recipes to my (thud-based) layer that clearly shows those > recipes are being scarfed from a newer layer? and i don't mean > mentioning that in the commit msg as that will still require perusing > all those commit messages. > > is there a clean way to do this? it may sound trivial, but in this > case, i'm looking at a couple hundred recipes that eventually show up > in newer layers that i could steal, and i really want to hang onto > that information for the next migration. > > thoughts? My usual approach for 2) is to have a recipes-backport/ in the layer that contains all recipes taken from more recent layers - completely new recipes, new versions of recipes, and sometimes just one specific change backported into a .bbappend. Example in a layer for warrior (dropping an unwanted patch): $ cat recipes-backport/e2fsprogs/e2fsprogs_1.44.5.bbappend SRC_URI_remove = "file://Revert-mke2fs-enable-the-metadata_csum-and-64bit-fea.patch" $ If you have many backported changes and migrations are often not to the latest Yocto release, you could further split this into recipes-backport-from-warrior/ etc. With an "upstream first" policy all upstreamable cases of 1) become cases of 2). For the example above see [1]. > rday cu Adrian [1] https://github.com/openembedded/openembedded-core/commit/f5edce401cfb31ebd0200adaba9a201caf7ea705