On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 5:40 AM, Otavio Salvador <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Richard Purdie < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Its not secret that I hate the current bitbake wrapper script and want >> to remove it for 101 different reasons. >> >> I now have code which removes the need for the double execution of >> bitbake which was the only fundamental reason we had it. The question >> therefore remains, what to do with the other pieces of the wrapper, >> specifically the tar and git versions checks. >> >> As a reminder for those who don't remember the problem here, the git >> version is checked since we use certain parameters in the git fetcher >> which need certain versions of git and git is in ASSUME_PROVIDED these >> days. Its possible to trigger git operations at part time to resolve >> revisions. tar is even more ugly since the wrong version has issues >> extracting sstate archives. These issues mean injecting building them >> into the dependency chain at the right point is hard. >> >> Personally, I think we carry around a bit too much legacy these days and >> its starting to hurt us. I would therefore like to propose that we take >> this opportunity to do some spring cleaning and simply error on: >> >> * broken tar versions >> * too old versions of git >> * python < 2.7.3 >> >> The python version check would move to the oe-init-build-env script, the >> git/tar versions to sanity.bbclass. >> >> The recommendation for anyone with these older versions would be to >> install our standalone tools tarball which would have python 2.7.3 and >> working versions of tar/git. >> >> The reason for the python version change is so we can embrace the >> unittest improvements in 2.7 and drop all of the workarounds for pre >> 2.7.3 bugs in bitbake. This starts to move us towards python 3, if this >> tarball works well, we'd use the same approach to move to python 3. >> >> Any objections? >> > > I fully agree in error on these situations and providing a workaround > solution for old host systems seems perfect. This would clean a good amount > of legacy code and I also agree it is the way to go. So count me as a > supporter for it :) > Agreed, I'm in favor as well. -- Christopher Larson
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
