> Look for the patchset '[RFC 0/7] bitbake-layers: Add
> update-layers-setup' posted on 7 November, particularly the comments
> to the individual patches, where we get to the design that should work
> and cover the use cases.
I had to work on some other issues that needed my attention,
so not too
On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 12:51, Andrey Zhizhikin wrote:
> > Unfortunately I have to say no to this. The problem is that this will
> > update to latest revisions on all the layers, which I believe is not
> > what people would want, as everything including poky etc. will be
> > shifting
Hello Alex,
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 11:08 AM Alexander Kanavin
wrote:
>
> Unfortunately I have to say no to this. The problem is that this will
> update to latest revisions on all the layers, which I believe is not
> what people would want, as everything including poky etc. will be
> shifting
Unfortunately I have to say no to this. The problem is that this will
update to latest revisions on all the layers, which I believe is not
what people would want, as everything including poky etc. will be
shifting uncontrollably.
Conceptually, I would not want oe-setup-layers to suffer from
Current script implementation uses revisions recorded in JSON file to
replicate previously recorded setup. While this is useful for complete
layer setup reproducibility, this does not allow the setup "upgrade" where
this script can be used to use remote branch information and latest HEAD,
have the
