From: Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] packagekit: Updated to 0.8.13
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 11:49:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <l77732$ggi$1@ger.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14902072.IG3b8o4YqW@helios>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Paul Eggleton schreef op 28-11-13 11:32:
> Hi Koen / Felipe,
>
> On Thursday 28 November 2013 10:22:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Felipe F. Tonello schreef op 28-11-13 01:56:
>>> From: "Felipe F. Tonello" <eu@felipetonello.com> This recipe supports
>>> the backend for packagekit dynamically based on the IMAGE_PKGTYPE.
>>
>> NAK! IMAGE_FEATURES should *never* change non-image recipe params.
>> This breaks using feeds horribly.
>
> IMAGE_PKGTYPE is influenced by PACKAGE_CLASSES; so this is not about
> IMAGE_FEATURES, and correct me if I'm wrong but maintaining package feeds
> would generally preclude switching to an alternative package manager,
> right?
No, it's perfectly possible to build both opkg and rpm, which is what I'm
currently doing. When doing that the DISTRO.conf does need to make a
decision on what to support for things like packagekit.
> Some options:
>
> 1) Apply the patch as-is. Changing the order/value of PACKAGE_CLASSES
> will mean this and anything that depends upon it will rebuild.
>
> 2) Install the appropriate backend via some code in the image recipe.
> Obviously this means you have to do this for every image recipe though.
>
> 3) Use non-dynamic PACKAGECONFIG. Of course this means you'll have to
> remember to change this manually if you change PACKAGE_CLASSES or it'll
> just be broken at runtime.
>
> Honestly, option 1 sounds like the best course to me here. This is rather
> a special case compared to other recipes.
1) will let you end up with packagekit_1.0.ipk that only supports RPM
2) Is what we would really want, but I don't think packagekit supports that :(
So that leaves 3, which makes it a clear DISTRO decision, like it should be.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iD8DBQFSlx+uMkyGM64RGpERAklsAJ0dtXhGERpNu+IizQN05XNliTk50wCfR8nl
xGpfq7tjqZPsx1V0hSYW5qs=
=1or8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-28 10:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-28 0:56 [PATCH] packagekit: Updated to 0.8.13 Felipe F. Tonello
2013-11-28 9:22 ` Koen Kooi
2013-11-28 10:32 ` Paul Eggleton
2013-11-28 10:49 ` Koen Kooi [this message]
2013-11-28 10:58 ` Paul Eggleton
2013-11-28 11:03 ` Koen Kooi
2013-12-10 1:15 ` Felipe Tonello
2013-12-10 1:18 ` Felipe Tonello
2013-12-10 1:17 ` Felipe Tonello
2013-12-10 9:26 ` Koen Kooi
2013-12-10 17:29 ` Felipe Ferreri Tonello
2013-12-11 8:40 ` Koen Kooi
2013-12-12 1:15 ` Felipe Ferreri Tonello
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='l77732$ggi$1@ger.gmane.org' \
--to=koen@dominion.thruhere.net \
--cc=openembedded-devel@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