Re: [PATCHv2] kernel/module-base: Append PR to MACHINE_KERNEL_PR

[Andreas Oberritter <obi@opendreambox.org>]

On 04/05/2011 08:22 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> On 04-04-11 20:12, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>> On 04/04/2011 07:54 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>> On 04-04-11 17:14, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>>>> On 04/04/2011 03:58 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>> On 04-04-11 15:00, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>>>>>> Ping. Any votes for or against this patch with either appended or
>>>>>> prepended PR?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't like this patch *at all*. Recipes can already do
>>>>> MACHINE_KERNEL_PR_append = "something" if they need to.
>>>
>>>> The use of MACHINE_KERNEL_PR is optional, so it feels really wrong to
>>>> append something to it in a recipe.
>>>
>>>>> Can you should me a specific example on how this would be an improvement?
>>>
>>>> With the version below. a distro can start to use MACHINE_KERNEL_PR any
>>>> time without breaking updates.
>>>
>>>> The vast majority of modules do not use MACHINE_KERNEL_PR
>>>
>>> It seems you don't understand how MACHINE_KERNEL_PR works. The *machine*
>>> sets it. The distro has *no* say in it. Therefore the module recipes
>>> don't need to set it, since it's automatic.
> 
>> That's nitpicking. Let me rephrase:
> 
>> With the previously cited version. a *machine* can start to use
>> MACHINE_KERNEL_PR any time without breaking updates.
> 
>> The vast majority of module recipes do not use MACHINE_KERNEL_PR. That
>> means that they use their own PR instead of appending something to
>> MACHINE_KERNEL_PR, as suggested by you. Setting MACHINE_KERNEL_PR in the
>> machine's configuration disables automatic rebuilds of 91% of module
>> recipes.
> 
> So make all the module recipes use MACHINE_KERNEL_PR and ditch PR.

Thereby making MACHINE_KERNEL_PR mandatory for all machines?