On Tue, 2026-06-02 at 10:21 +0200, Yoann Congal via lists.openembedded.org wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue Jun 2, 2026 at 8:29 AM CEST, Sai Sneha wrote: > > Add a shared helper function check_uri_srcrev() that checks whether > > a single SCM URI has a valid SRCREV set in the datastore. > > > > The function uses unexpanded getVar() calls (False flag) to safely > > inspect SRCREV without triggering AUTOREV expansion or live network > > fetches. It mirrors BitBake's internal SRCREV resolution fallback > > chain exactly: > > SRCREV_<name>:pn-<recipe>, SRCREV_<name>, SRCREV:pn-<recipe>, SRCREV > That sounds wrong. Bitbake uses the *expanded* value: > lib/bb/fetch2/__init__.py: > 1256 srcrev = d.getVar(a) > > It needs the expansion to handle every possible overrides (for example, > MACHINE or DISTRO, but those are not the only one)
I don't think we should be handling overrides here at all, that's the job of the bitbake parser. Best regards, -- Paul Barker
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#238044): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/238044 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/119607372/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
