[PATCH] glibc: fix upstream version check

[PATCH] glibc: fix upstream version check

[Alexander Kanavin]

Exclude x.y.90* pre-release versions in particular.

Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
---
 meta/recipes-core/glibc/cross-localedef-native_2.27.bb | 2 +-
 meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.27.bb                  | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/cross-localedef-native_2.27.bb b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/cross-localedef-native_2.27.bb
index f1e4a657cf4..6344c7acd05 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/cross-localedef-native_2.27.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/cross-localedef-native_2.27.bb
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ FILESEXTRAPATHS =. "${FILE_DIRNAME}/${PN}:${FILE_DIRNAME}/glibc:"
 
 SRCBRANCH ?= "release/${PV}/master"
 GLIBC_GIT_URI ?= "git://sourceware.org/git/glibc.git"
-UPSTREAM_CHECK_GITTAGREGEX = "(?P<pver>\d+\.\d+(\.\d+)*)"
+UPSTREAM_CHECK_GITTAGREGEX = "(?P<pver>\d+\.\d+(\.(?!90)\d+)*)"
 
 SRCREV_glibc ?= "23158b08a0908f381459f273a984c6fd328363cb"
 SRCREV_localedef ?= "de5bdbd5e76b5403a4151b9b9f958b6cca36b3e7"
diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.27.bb b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.27.bb
index c4042d16fe2..827857dfc84 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.27.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.27.bb
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ SRCREV ?= "23158b08a0908f381459f273a984c6fd328363cb"
 SRCBRANCH ?= "release/${PV}/master"
 
 GLIBC_GIT_URI ?= "git://sourceware.org/git/glibc.git"
-UPSTREAM_CHECK_GITTAGREGEX = "(?P<pver>\d+\.\d+(\.\d+)*)"
+UPSTREAM_CHECK_GITTAGREGEX = "(?P<pver>\d+\.\d+(\.(?!90)\d+)*)"
 
 SRC_URI = "${GLIBC_GIT_URI};branch=${SRCBRANCH};name=glibc \
            file://etc/ld.so.conf \
-- 
2.16.1

Re: [PATCH] glibc: fix upstream version check

[Khem Raj]

On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 4:15 AM, Alexander Kanavin
<alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> Exclude x.y.90* pre-release versions in particular.
>

Looks ok. So I guess it pokes at master branch right ?

> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  meta/recipes-core/glibc/cross-localedef-native_2.27.bb | 2 +-
>  meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.27.bb                  | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/cross-localedef-native_2.27.bb b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/cross-localedef-native_2.27.bb
> index f1e4a657cf4..6344c7acd05 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/cross-localedef-native_2.27.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/cross-localedef-native_2.27.bb
> @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ FILESEXTRAPATHS =. "${FILE_DIRNAME}/${PN}:${FILE_DIRNAME}/glibc:"
>
>  SRCBRANCH ?= "release/${PV}/master"
>  GLIBC_GIT_URI ?= "git://sourceware.org/git/glibc.git"
> -UPSTREAM_CHECK_GITTAGREGEX = "(?P<pver>\d+\.\d+(\.\d+)*)"
> +UPSTREAM_CHECK_GITTAGREGEX = "(?P<pver>\d+\.\d+(\.(?!90)\d+)*)"
>
>  SRCREV_glibc ?= "23158b08a0908f381459f273a984c6fd328363cb"
>  SRCREV_localedef ?= "de5bdbd5e76b5403a4151b9b9f958b6cca36b3e7"
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.27.bb b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.27.bb
> index c4042d16fe2..827857dfc84 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.27.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.27.bb
> @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ SRCREV ?= "23158b08a0908f381459f273a984c6fd328363cb"
>  SRCBRANCH ?= "release/${PV}/master"
>
>  GLIBC_GIT_URI ?= "git://sourceware.org/git/glibc.git"
> -UPSTREAM_CHECK_GITTAGREGEX = "(?P<pver>\d+\.\d+(\.\d+)*)"
> +UPSTREAM_CHECK_GITTAGREGEX = "(?P<pver>\d+\.\d+(\.(?!90)\d+)*)"
>
>  SRC_URI = "${GLIBC_GIT_URI};branch=${SRCBRANCH};name=glibc \
>             file://etc/ld.so.conf \
> --
> 2.16.1
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [PATCH] glibc: fix upstream version check

[Alexander Kanavin]

On 03/17/2018 05:16 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 4:15 AM, Alexander Kanavin
> <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> Exclude x.y.90* pre-release versions in particular.
>>
> 
> Looks ok. So I guess it pokes at master branch right ?

It lists all tags regardless of branch and picks the highest.

Alex

Re: [PATCH] glibc: fix upstream version check

[Khem Raj]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 613 bytes --]

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 1:53 AM Alexander Kanavin <
alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On 03/17/2018 05:16 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 4:15 AM, Alexander Kanavin
> > <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >> Exclude x.y.90* pre-release versions in particular.
> >>
> >
> > Looks ok. So I guess it pokes at master branch right ?
>
> It lists all tags regardless of branch and picks the highest.


I think that does not work effectively for how glibc release works we
should probably track the Release branch name and deduce version from there

>
>
> Alex
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1132 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] glibc: fix upstream version check

[Alexander Kanavin]

On 03/19/2018 05:29 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>     It lists all tags regardless of branch and picks the highest.
> 
> 
> I think that does not work effectively for how glibc release works we 
> should probably track the Release branch name and deduce version from there

Glibc does tag their releases, so I'm not sure why you want to track 
branch names instead, they contain no additional information.

Alex

Re: [PATCH] glibc: fix upstream version check

[Alexander Kanavin]

On 03/19/2018 06:36 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> that works too I guess if we have good enough filters to detect it. It
> seems there is more noise in tags than in branches,

That's what UPSTREAM_CHECK_GITTAGREGEX is for. You can set it to filter 
precisely the tags you want.

Alex

Re: [PATCH] glibc: fix upstream version check

[Khem Raj]

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 9:23 AM, Alexander Kanavin
<alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 03/19/2018 05:29 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>
>>     It lists all tags regardless of branch and picks the highest.
>>
>>
>> I think that does not work effectively for how glibc release works we
>> should probably track the Release branch name and deduce version from there
>
>
> Glibc does tag their releases, so I'm not sure why you want to track branch
> names instead, they contain no additional information.

that works too I guess if we have good enough filters to detect it. It
seems there is more noise in tags than in branches,

>
> Alex