From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.windriver.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 767696B50C for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 02:13:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s0E2D2sq011000 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 13 Jan 2014 18:13:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.224.162.226] (128.224.162.226) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.347.0; Mon, 13 Jan 2014 18:13:02 -0800 Message-ID: <52D49D2C.6020904@windriver.com> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 10:13:00 +0800 From: Robert Yang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Martin Jansa , Henning Heinold References: <20140113102147.GK16995@jama> <52D3C44B.20403@windriver.com> <20140113115249.GA22825@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20140113115856.GL16995@jama> In-Reply-To: <20140113115856.GL16995@jama> Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] refactor the archive*.bbcalss 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: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 02:13:06 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/13/2014 07:58 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:52:49PM +0100, Henning Heinold wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 06:47:39PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: >>> >>> On 01/13/2014 06:21 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 12:20:14AM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: >>>>> * The archive*.bbclass didn't work, and there were a few problems, for >>>>> example: >>>>> 1) There were a few duplicated code >>>>> 2) There was no src_dir.org (or orig), but the diff command still use >>>>> it, and it is not easy to fix this issue if we don't change a lot >>>>> of the code. >>>>> 3) It didn't archive the source for the native or gcc >>>>> 4) The work flow is not very well >>>>> 5) The "subprocess.call('fakeroot cp xxxx'" should be removed >>>>> 6) And others ... >>>>> >>>>> * So that we have to refactor it, the benefits are: >>>>> 1) Fix the problems and make it work well. >>>>> 2) Reduce more than 400 lines in total. >>>>> 3) Make it easy to use. >>>> >>>> Have you seen >>>> http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2013-December/087729.html >>>> ? >>>> >>>> Could you review it/integrate changes from it? >>> >>> I've looked at it just now, I think the problems that you mentioned have been >>> fixed during the refactor. It won't install/remove the files manually any more, >>> they will be installed/removed by the sstate. And the usage become easier, just >>> this would be OK by default: >>> >>> INHERIT += "archiver" >>> >>> And we can easily add other functions when needed. >>> >>> // Robert >>> >> >> Hi Robert, >> >> does the whole thread means it is broken in dora too? Are there plans to backport the patches? > > AFAIK it's broken everywhere, I would like to have it backported to > dylan as well (after testing that it indeed fixes source files being > removed) > Yes, Martin is right, but I'm not sure whether we should backport them since we have change a lot of the code, and there should be bugs, usually, though, I've done as many testing as I can. BTW., I've updated the code a little in the PULL: Use "1" or "0" rather than "yes" or "no", which seems more popular in oe, for example: ARCHIVER_MODE[dumpdata] = "1" (it was "yes" before). // Robert > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >