On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 09:39:32PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Sat, 2012-09-15 at 19:28 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 06:23:37PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > > > On Sat, 2012-09-15 at 18:20 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > > > > This changes .so name from libffi5 to libffi6, breaking every recipe > > > > depending on libffi when someone is using debian.bbclass. > > > > > > How exactly do the recipes break? The whole point of debian.bbclass is > > > to avoid breakage when this happens by making libffi5 and libffi6 > > > parallel installable. If that isn't working then there is clearly a bug > > > somewhere and we should fix that. > > > > libffi5 is no longer in feed, so if you try to install something from > > feed which still has libffi5 in depends it will fail. > > Ah, right. So it's not actually the recipes which are broken, it's just > that something is wrong with whatever maintains the feed and the old > binaries are no longer installable. I guess you need to figure out why > libffi5 is being removed and prevent that from happening.
Old ipk binaries are removed in package_write_ipk task. Even when I keep those binaries in public feed (rsynced from deploy/ipk/) then I would have to call opkg-make-index in that public feed to keep them in Packages too. So by default you can assume that libffi5*.ipk gets missing as soon as you bump libffi to version with new .so name like libffi6. And it's not only someone doing opkg install on target, do_rootfs fails too if you have any of those affected packages in your image. Cheers, -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
