Openembedded Core Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: alex.kanavin@gmail.com, Qi.Chen@windriver.com
Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org, randy.macleod@windriver.com
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [RFC PATCH 1/3] version-check.conf: add mechanism for checking version mismatch
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 11:25:47 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c688ddacdb12fbf3b5ff45b27e6a63f7e8892ccd.camel@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANNYZj-hqZOEcwtvnCdSY-FrVBfR8bZxS3OgjUmWLLQ__+307A@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 2025-03-27 at 12:22 +0100, Alexander Kanavin via
lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Mar 2025 at 07:22, Chen Qi via lists.openembedded.org
> <Qi.Chen=windriver.com@lists.openembedded.org> wrote:
> > The basic idea is to use qemu to run executables at build time,
> > extract
> > possible versions, and check if there's a mismatch found.
> 
> Should this check be in its own layer for now? If it's in core, there
> should be evidence that it's broadly useful and used (and no one's
> asked for it before as far as I'm aware), and it should be tested for
> correct behaviour and against regressions. I don't feel it meets
> these
> criteria at the moment.
> 
> Git fetcher has recently gained the ability to match up source
> revisions with tags specified in recipes, and will error out if
> SRCREV
> is set wrongly. We just need to update recipes to specify tags (with
> ${PV} in them somewhere, so they remain valid on version updates). So
> sending in those updates would be most welcome.

The new SRCREV vs tag code was my first thought when seeing this patch
too. 

It is a nice idea to check the version information and having something
somewhere to do it is nice but I'm not sure maintaining this in OE-Core
is the right thing to do for it...

Cheers,

Richard


  reply	other threads:[~2025-03-27 11:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-27  6:21 [RFC PATCH 0/3] Add a mechanism to check runtime and recipe version mismatch Qi.Chen
2025-03-27  6:21 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] version-check.conf: add mechanism for checking " Qi.Chen
2025-03-27 11:22   ` [OE-core] " Alexander Kanavin
2025-03-27 11:25     ` Richard Purdie [this message]
2025-03-28  2:42       ` ChenQi
2025-03-28 15:21         ` Quentin Schulz
2025-03-27  6:21 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] mc: fix buildpath QA regarding unzip Qi.Chen
2025-03-27  6:21 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] time: fix runtime version from UNKNOWN to 1.9 Qi.Chen
2025-03-27 10:56   ` [OE-core] " Ross Burton

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=c688ddacdb12fbf3b5ff45b27e6a63f7e8892ccd.camel@linuxfoundation.org \
    --to=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=Qi.Chen@windriver.com \
    --cc=alex.kanavin@gmail.com \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=randy.macleod@windriver.com \
    /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