> From: openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org > [openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] on behalf of Martin Jansa > [martin.ja...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 5:18 PM > To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer > Subject: Re: [OE-core] Coordinating inter-layer dependencies >
...cut... > > As I understand it, the PRINC increases the PR of the appended recipe. Then > > the resulting package will have a version that is the same as "the next" > > version of the base recipe. Since many people (me included) hardly remember > > what they did a month ago, isn't there a big risk of confusion in your > > deployed systems if packages are upgraded there? > > > > I do something like PR .= ".local0" where "local" is the name of the > > layer containing the .bbappend. > > Of course this will create extensive version strings if multiple .bbappends > > are applied but the alternative is that you have no idea what layers that > > appended and what the the base version of the recipe really was. > > So if you have some layer adding > layerB: PR .= ".b0" > and other > layerA: PR .= ".a0" > > and PR appends are evaluated in this order, then you will break upgrade > patch forever if you have to remove layerB for some reason and you > cannot even fix it by bumping numbers in your layerA unless you rename > all PR appends as ".c0" right? That's why I prefer to use PRINC. I don't really see what is breaking but I'm guessing that the problem you describe has to do with feed based upgrades and automatic evaluation of which version is latest (?). I don't do things that way but instead explicitly download and replace packages and then I prefer to be able to see exactly what was built. Of course you can achieve that also by some external procedure to make sure that you always no matter what produce increasing PR numbers on your packages but if you fail there is no telling... > > Yes it increases PR of desired number, but every time.. so if upper > layer increments PR your .bbappend will again increment it so you still > get always increasing sequence. Unless, again, I remove a layer, then I'll have to extra-bump another "innocent" layer to keep the numbers up. BR // Mats _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
