On Wed, 2025-11-12 at 11:06 +0200, Mikko Rapeli via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 10:35:08AM -0800, [email protected] wrote: > > LAVA Test Report for Job 123474 > > ================================================== > > > > GitLab Pipeline Information: > > Project: gpit > > Branch: main > > Pipeline: > > https://gitlab.com/Linaro/trustedsubstrate/gpit/-/pipelines/2152817594 > > bitbake: 2c6c40bdab8ebc6c04fe9992524add967fb4a053 > > bitbake git describe: yocto-5.2.1-149-g2c6c40bda > > openembedded-core: e556df28f47e754b53e1f46c97dde2b19fd8fad1 > > openembedded-core git describe: uninative-5.0-152-ge556df28f4 > > meta-yocto: 66ea31cee15309af07afeee8dec8a6fe1d92d28e > > meta-yocto git describe: 5.3_M3-3-g66ea31c > > So this is our first build and test run with separate bitbake, > oe-core and meta-yocto built using kas to replace old poky repo > master branch which no longer builds. Setup details in > https://gitlab.com/Linaro/trustedsubstrate/gpit > > The "git describe" output with tags is a bit confusing. Would it be > possible to use same version/milestone names there? > > Currently it's a bit hard to tell if the trees are fully in sync and > if > yocto-5.2.1, uninative-5.0 and 5.3_M3 are compatible with each other > or not. From pure tags it is not easy to see if trees used same > branches, for example.
This whole area is a mess. The OE TSC required certain things in the past. We'd have to dig out the minutes to remember all the details but I didn't 100% agree with what was asked for and we went ahead and did it regardless. We probably need to revisit this but the new TSC has been unable to work out a time to meet or schedule its meetings. Even if we had, someone needs to look up and summarise what decisions were made and why. Keep in mind there is years of some people being very vocal if there were yocto references outside of yocto 'owned' repositories (i.e. in bitbake/oe-core). I think we're past some of that now but certainly not all of it. I actually dread this whole topic. We also need to work out what we are currently doing and not doing and why. I know I recently asked release engineering to stop doing certain things as they were completely non-sensical. We had a load of problematic tags to remove and new ones to create to replace them to try and ensure everything was consistent. I'd have to go and check whether that happened and whether we're now doing the right things or not. Now, that all sounds fine, some people need to go and do some painful work. It will be far from simple, take a ton of time and nobody will actually really see it all or ever value the end result but it can be done. Even if (when) we do this, it isn't going to quite give you what you want due to things like the uninative tags. Those usually happen mid release and will "corrupt" the git describe output as those tags will be more recent. So yes, it does need fixing but it isn't as simple as you might think. I'm totally burnt out and the current release is stalled. Perhaps someone else from the TSCs wants to go and resolve this? Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#226201): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/226201 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/116253564/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
