On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 8:34 AM, Bruce Ashfield <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 3:49 AM, Martin Jansa <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I need an updated python-<foo> package for an unrelated package >> >> And how far will you go? >> > > pretty far. I work with a lot of deep stacks that have a lot of specific > dependencies as well as compatibility issues. > >> If you want just newer python-<foo> and nothing else, will you take other >> changes to other python-* recipes from meta-python layer? There is a lot of >> recipes there, if you're so picky about updates, then you shouldn't update >> whole oe-core as well. > > I actually don't always, but generally speaking, I haven't had many > problems with package updates from oe-core. I end up with breakage > due to core build system changes, and that impacts oe-core and any > layer either.
oh, and I'd add that this point is somewhat contrived (few package breakages), since that is really just a fallout of the oe-core packages being fairly ... core .. (and boring), so really there aren't any hard or strange dependencies that cause issues and that's a fall out of the content, not the workflow or model (or git repo split, or not!). Cheers, Bruce > > But as I pointed out, I'm not looking to have my problem 'solved', I'm > just pointing out that it is a valid concern .. whether or not others > agree. > > Cheers, > > Bruce > >> >> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 1:51 AM, Bruce Ashfield <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > On 2/20/18 9:13 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >>> >> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:50 AM, akuster808 <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 02/20/2018 02:45 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Is now a good time to talk about splitting up meta-oe? Some layers >>> >>>> are >>> >>>> actively developed and maintained (one example: meta-python), others >>> >>>> are >>> >>>> basically bitrotting and only get touched when something else causes >>> >>>> them >>> >>>> to break world builds (one example: meta-gnome). I've long felt that >>> >>>> meta-oe should be split up and the high quality layers managed in >>> >>>> their own >>> >>>> repositories so patches to them don't get held up by breakage in >>> >>>> other >>> >>>> sub-layers. >>> >>> You make it sound like meta-oe is not a high quality layer. I could >>> >>> make the same claim about oe-core master. >>> >>> >>> >>> I don't see the connection in patches being held up due to breakage in >>> >>> other sub layers. This only happens if the dependency fail to build. >>> >>> >>> >>> You lose control over the quality in current layers that reside in >>> >>> meta-openbedded just like you have no control over all the other >>> >>> layers >>> >>> residing in the community. It makes maintaining stable versions very >>> >>> difficult. Well, unless The Yocto Project takes over them.. I guess >>> >>> that >>> >>> would work then. >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Another advantage of splitting out the high quality layers is that >>> >>>> we'd >>> >>>> like to look at running more community layers through the Yocto >>> >>>> autobuilder, and granular layers make that easier to manage. >>> >>> I thought not including layers in bblayers.conf was easy enough. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Comments? >>> >>> >>> >>> What problem do you thing you are trying to solve here? >>> >> >>> >> My unrelated issues are that I can't update one layer, without getting >>> >> all of the updates. >>> >> .. but that is both a good thing (i.e. they are all tested together, >>> >> so you know that the >>> >> single SRCREV update is good for all layers), and a bad thing (when >>> >> you just want a >>> >> new python recipe update from meta-python, but don't want other >>> >> changes). >>> >> >>> > >>> > if you dont include the layers in your BBLAYERS and they become >>> > effectively non existent, unless you are on metered internet connection, >>> > where downloading unused stuff would save you bandwidth, it should be >>> > ok. No ? >>> >>> Its not that. >>> >>> I *am* building the different layers, but say I have a stable set of >>> packages >>> and working images .. but for whatever reason, I need an updated >>> python-<foo> >>> package for an unrelated package, or some other layer that needs a newer >>> version, etc. >>> >>> How do I get that, without taking updates to all the layers ? .. and >>> layers that >>> I really didn't want to update. I have to do some sort of combo-layer, >>> carry >>> my own copy of the recipe, etc. >>> >>> So there are definitely ways to do it, I'm just pointing out that I >>> end up taking >>> some build failures/issues from time to time on packages I didn't really >>> need to update. >>> >>> The flip side of that argument is that all of the layers and sub layers >>> have >>> gone through some sort of global build, and hence I know that they all >>> have >>> worked together for someone. If I can update pieces individually, I break >>> that .. and I own the broken bits after that .. which again, goes to >>> my point that >>> fixing one workflow/issue can break another :D >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> > >>> >> It is very likely that splitting the layer would help one issue, but >>> >> make the other worse. >>> >> >>> >> So no solution from me, just an observation about potential issue. >>> >> >>> >> Cheers, >>> >> >>> >> Bruce >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> - armin >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Ross >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> Openembedded-devel mailing list >>> >>> [email protected] >>> >>> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await >>> thee at its end" >>> -- >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Openembedded-devel mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel >> >> > > > > -- > "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await > thee at its end" -- "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end" -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
