From: Ulf Samuelsson <angstrom-dev@emagii.com>
To: Discussion of the angstrom distribution development
<angstrom-distro-devel@linuxtogo.org>,
Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Issues with PREFERRED_VERSION/PREFERRED_PROVIDER for the kernel
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 17:59:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52615ACB.1010203@emagii.com> (raw)
1. If you define something in the <MACHINE>.conf and in <DISTRO>.conf
then <DISTRO>.conf has higher priority.
This is really non-intuitive.
2. If you define a PREFERRED_VERSION which does not have a corresponding
".bb" file
you do not get a warning, and the latest PREFERRED_PROVIDER is used.
3. If you define a PREFERRED_PROVIDER which does not have a
corresponding ".bb" file
you *do* get a warning, with a list of possible providers, and
bitbake will bake the
first in the list.
It will also bake the *latest* version, even if that provider has a
PREFERRED_VERSION.
4. If I define PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel = "linux-x" in
<machine>.conf,
bitbake will bake "linux-x" using the latest version
5. If I define PREFERRED_VERSION_virtual/kernel = "3.7.0", this is ignored.
6. If I define PREFERRED_VERSION_linux-x = "3.7.0", this is accepted and
linux-x_3.7.0.bb is used.
-------------------------------------------
Questions:
You need to parse <machine>.conf before you parse the DISTRO since
some things in the distro is machine dependent.
I.E: PREFERRED_VERSION_binutils_avr32 = "2.17"
(1) Would it be possible to reparse <machine>.conf
after DISTRO has been parsed, resetting some stuff, overridden by
the DISTRO?
(2) Why no warning, if the PREFERRED_VERSION cannot be found.
It would be good to have which versions are available.
For the Beaglebone, you have a linux-mainline_3.7.bb, but if you set
PREFERRED_VERSION_linux-mainline = "3.7"
you still get "3.8.13" built, because "linux-mainline_3.7.bb"
contains PV = "3.7.0"
A warning would have been helpful!
(3) Why is PREFERRED_VERSION_virtual/kernel accepted without error
message, but ignored?
(4) If bitbake cannot find a recommended PROVIDER, and selects something
else,
why not use the PREFERRED_VERSION if it exists?
BR
Ulf Samuelsson
next reply other threads:[~2013-10-18 15:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-18 15:59 Ulf Samuelsson [this message]
2013-10-18 16:31 ` Issues with PREFERRED_VERSION/PREFERRED_PROVIDER for the kernel Koen Kooi
2013-10-18 17:05 ` Ulf Samuelsson
2013-10-18 17:29 ` Chris Larson
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=52615ACB.1010203@emagii.com \
--to=angstrom-dev@emagii.com \
--cc=angstrom-distro-devel@linuxtogo.org \
--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