Openembedded Devel Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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-----



  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