On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 12:09 PM Ross Burton <ross.bur...@arm.com> wrote:
> On 1 Dec 2022, at 04:27, Zoran via lists.yoctoproject.org > <zoran.stojsavljevic=gmail....@lists.yoctoproject.org> wrote: > > I do not understand why we need to explicitly name releases for such > > simple generic layers?! > > The compatibility is because over time things change: override syntax has > changed, classes get added or removed, functionality may appear in > bitbake. Sometimes the breakage is subtle, and a layer may parse and > appear to build fine, but be broken. > > Your meta-socketcan layer is broken in honister onwards despite claiming > compatibility, for example. > And here is another example why nobody should be using meta-socketcan: https://github.com/ZoranStojsavljevic/meta-socketcan/commit/cefd86cd1def9ad2e63be527f8ce36a076d7e17c# You cannot change the declared LICENSE of the components, just because you wish them to use the same license as the layer metadata, especially when those components clearly declare different LICENSE in the source code, e.g.: https://github.com/linux-can/socketcand/commit/a7ab9878d11ac187b92dcf48b6331c228f4f4b92 Using COMMON_LICENSE_DIR in LIC_FILES_CHKSUM is another anti-pattern which just disables whole purpose of LIC_FILES_CHKSUM and this is acceptable only for "pure-metadata" recipes like packagegroups or image recipes.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58700): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/58700 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/95375670/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
