From: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>
To: <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] policy proposal: INC_PR
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:10:00 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E78E508.9080706@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALT56yOyp2VYEziGiZj4PLjYHFhTkxisKwWnP7_Uy69Cc1ufYw@mail.gmail.com>
On 9/20/11 2:04 PM, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
> Hello, colleagues,
>
> While debugging some stuff in oe-core & company I've noticed that
> lot's of packages
> either don't use INC_PR, or misuse it (e.g. .inc has INC_PR, but then
> .bb just defines PR = "rX").
I've noticed similar things. I'd agree, we should define and use INC_PR for
items that have .inc files. There have been many times that I need to fix a bug
in the .inc file and end up manually updating the PR is 2 or 3 recipes that use
the .inc.
One question though, how do we handle packages with multilib .inc files?
INC_PR += ... (or is it .=)
--Mark
> From my previous experience with oe-dev, I found INC_PR very usefull
> and error-prone feature.
> What about making usage of INC_PR a policy decision, demanding that
> all new packages should use INC_PR for their recipes, if .inc files
> are used. And then define a grace period
> during which all remaining packages should be converted to INC_PR (3
> months? Next release? I really don't know).
>
> I'm sorry if this issue was already discussed somewhere and I'm
> duplicating the efforts
> or proposing already discarded idea.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-20 19:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-20 19:04 [RFC] policy proposal: INC_PR Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
2011-09-20 19:10 ` Mark Hatle [this message]
2011-09-20 20:30 ` Richard Purdie
2011-09-20 20:36 ` Koen Kooi
2011-09-20 20:47 ` Richard Purdie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4E78E508.9080706@windriver.com \
--to=mark.hatle@windriver.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox