Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] apt: fix upstream version check

[Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com>]

Hi Alex,

Il giorno Tue, 24 May 2022 19:36:22 +0200
"Alexander Kanavin" <alex.kanavin@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de>
> ---
>  meta/recipes-devtools/apt/apt_2.4.5.bb | 10 ++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/apt/apt_2.4.5.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/apt/apt_2.4.5.bb
> index 95c25e3036..1d94dd118c 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/apt/apt_2.4.5.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/apt/apt_2.4.5.bb
> @@ -31,8 +31,14 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING.GPL;md5=b234ee4d69f5fce4486a80fdaf4a4263"
>  # the package is taken from snapshots.debian.org; that source is static and goes stale
>  # so we check the latest upstream from a directory that does get updated
>  UPSTREAM_CHECK_URI = "${DEBIAN_MIRROR}/main/a/apt/"
> -
> -inherit cmake perlnative bash-completion upstream-version-is-even useradd
> +# apt seems to follow a peculiar version policy, where every *other* even version
> +# is considered stable, e.g. 1.0, 1.4, 1.8, 2.2, 2.6, etc. As there is no way
> +# to express 'divisible by 4 plus 2' in regex (that I know of), let's hardcode a few.

Or, "how to reinvent the wheel in order to uselessly complicate other
people's lives".

I'm taking your patch for testing, but I have a question.

Is this  policy documented? If so, IMO a URL here would be nice.
Otherwise, is it wise to encode future stable releases here without
really knowing whether the practice seen so far will go on in the
future?

> +UPSTREAM_CHECK_REGEX = "[^\d\.](?P<pver>((2\.2)|(2\.6)|(3\.0)|(3\.4)|(3\.8)|(4\.2))(\.\d+)+)\.tar"

Maybe this would be more generic (untested):

  (([2468\.[26])|([3579]\.[048]))

-- 
Luca Ceresoli, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com