* Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? @ 2010-08-09 13:26 Hauser, Wolfgang (external) 2010-08-09 14:22 ` Chris Larson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Hauser, Wolfgang (external) @ 2010-08-09 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel Hello, I want to change some used versions of packages, so I added a PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>="xxx" for the packages I want to have a special(newer) version to be used. But e. g. for busybox the version defined in the used <distro>.conf is used instead of my setting in local.conf. Should local.conf not overrule <distro/machine>.conf ?? Regards Wolfgang Hauser ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-09 13:26 Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? Hauser, Wolfgang (external) @ 2010-08-09 14:22 ` Chris Larson 2010-08-09 19:01 ` Frans Meulenbroeks 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Chris Larson @ 2010-08-09 14:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Hauser, Wolfgang (external) < Wolfgang.Hauser.external@eads.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I want to change some used versions of packages, so I added a > PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>="xxx" for the packages I want to have a > special(newer) version to be used. > > But e. g. for busybox the version defined in the used <distro>.conf is > used instead of my setting in local.conf. > > Should local.conf not overrule <distro/machine>.conf ?? Conceptually, local should override everything, as it's the "most specific" information available, but from a technical standpoint, we can't parse the machine and distro configs until local.conf is parsed, as that's usually where the MACHINE and DISTRO are set. You can use a 'local' override to get around it, or you can ask the distro/machine maintainer to use ?= assignments (set only if unset). PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>_local = "xxx" is how you use the override. -- Christopher Larson clarson at kergoth dot com Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus Maintainer - Tslib Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-09 14:22 ` Chris Larson @ 2010-08-09 19:01 ` Frans Meulenbroeks 2010-08-09 23:15 ` Graham Gower 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Frans Meulenbroeks @ 2010-08-09 19:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel 2010/8/9 Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>: > On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Hauser, Wolfgang (external) < > Wolfgang.Hauser.external@eads.com> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I want to change some used versions of packages, so I added a >> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>="xxx" for the packages I want to have a >> special(newer) version to be used. >> >> But e. g. for busybox the version defined in the used <distro>.conf is >> used instead of my setting in local.conf. >> >> Should local.conf not overrule <distro/machine>.conf ?? > > > Conceptually, local should override everything, as it's the "most specific" > information available, but from a technical standpoint, we can't parse the > machine and distro configs until local.conf is parsed, as that's usually > where the MACHINE and DISTRO are set. You can use a 'local' override to get > around it, or you can ask the distro/machine maintainer to use ?= > assignments (set only if unset). > > PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>_local = "xxx" is how you use the override. The real solution woud be to either temporary store the PREFERRED_VERSION and apply it later on. Alternately we could parse local.conf twice, the first time ignoring the PREFERRED lines, and the 2nd time only looking at these. Yet another solution could be to split local.conf into two pieces, one with settings like MACHINE and DISTRO, the other one with the overrides. Frans (who typically sets MACHINE in the environment, not in local.conf, makes things a lot simpler if you have to build for multiple machines) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-09 19:01 ` Frans Meulenbroeks @ 2010-08-09 23:15 ` Graham Gower 2010-08-10 7:00 ` Frans Meulenbroeks 2010-08-10 20:50 ` Koen Kooi 0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Graham Gower @ 2010-08-09 23:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel On 10 August 2010 04:31, Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com> wrote: > 2010/8/9 Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>: >> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Hauser, Wolfgang (external) < >> Wolfgang.Hauser.external@eads.com> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I want to change some used versions of packages, so I added a >>> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>="xxx" for the packages I want to have a >>> special(newer) version to be used. >>> >>> But e. g. for busybox the version defined in the used <distro>.conf is >>> used instead of my setting in local.conf. >>> >>> Should local.conf not overrule <distro/machine>.conf ?? >> >> >> Conceptually, local should override everything, as it's the "most specific" >> information available, but from a technical standpoint, we can't parse the >> machine and distro configs until local.conf is parsed, as that's usually >> where the MACHINE and DISTRO are set. You can use a 'local' override to get >> around it, or you can ask the distro/machine maintainer to use ?= >> assignments (set only if unset). >> >> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>_local = "xxx" is how you use the override. > > The real solution woud be to either temporary store the > PREFERRED_VERSION and apply it later on. > Alternately we could parse local.conf twice, the first time ignoring > the PREFERRED lines, and the 2nd time only looking at these. > Yet another solution could be to split local.conf into two pieces, one > with settings like MACHINE and DISTRO, the other one with the > overrides. Wouldn't it be far simpler to fix the distro conf file(s)? E.g. apply something like this: s/^PREFERRED_VERSION_\([a-z]*\) =/PREFERRED_VERSION_\1 ?=/ -Graham ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-09 23:15 ` Graham Gower @ 2010-08-10 7:00 ` Frans Meulenbroeks 2010-08-11 3:59 ` Mike Westerhof 2010-08-10 20:50 ` Koen Kooi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Frans Meulenbroeks @ 2010-08-10 7:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel 2010/8/10 Graham Gower <graham.gower@gmail.com>: > On 10 August 2010 04:31, Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2010/8/9 Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>: >>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Hauser, Wolfgang (external) < >>> Wolfgang.Hauser.external@eads.com> wrote: >>> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>_local = "xxx" is how you use the override. >> >> The real solution woud be to either temporary store the >> PREFERRED_VERSION and apply it later on. >> Alternately we could parse local.conf twice, the first time ignoring >> the PREFERRED lines, and the 2nd time only looking at these. >> Yet another solution could be to split local.conf into two pieces, one >> with settings like MACHINE and DISTRO, the other one with the >> overrides. > > Wouldn't it be far simpler to fix the distro conf file(s)? E.g. apply > something like this: > s/^PREFERRED_VERSION_\([a-z]*\) =/PREFERRED_VERSION_\1 ?=/ Yeah. Didn't really think about that one, but if distro's want to change and adhere to it, that would be the simplest solution Machines that pin something should probably also use weak binding. Conceptually it is probably marginally less desirable than a solution where local.conf has *always* control. What do the distro's think about this? Frans ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-10 7:00 ` Frans Meulenbroeks @ 2010-08-11 3:59 ` Mike Westerhof 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Mike Westerhof @ 2010-08-11 3:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > 2010/8/10 Graham Gower <graham.gower@gmail.com>: >> On 10 August 2010 04:31, Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 2010/8/9 Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>: >>>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Hauser, Wolfgang (external) < >>>> Wolfgang.Hauser.external@eads.com> wrote: > >>>> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>_local = "xxx" is how you use the override. >>> The real solution woud be to either temporary store the >>> PREFERRED_VERSION and apply it later on. >>> Alternately we could parse local.conf twice, the first time ignoring >>> the PREFERRED lines, and the 2nd time only looking at these. >>> Yet another solution could be to split local.conf into two pieces, one >>> with settings like MACHINE and DISTRO, the other one with the >>> overrides. >> Wouldn't it be far simpler to fix the distro conf file(s)? E.g. apply >> something like this: >> s/^PREFERRED_VERSION_\([a-z]*\) =/PREFERRED_VERSION_\1 ?=/ > > Yeah. > Didn't really think about that one, but if distro's want to change and > adhere to it, that would be the simplest solution > Machines that pin something should probably also use weak binding. > Conceptually it is probably marginally less desirable than a solution > where local.conf has *always* control. > > What do the distro's think about this? I think it is the decision of EACH DISTRO to make, and not something to be dictated by OE in general. Mind you, I appreciate the general recommendation -- it's a sound idea to make it so that a knowledgeable developer's local.conf overrides most distro preferred version settings. I use the technique frequently. But on the other hand, I appreciate the ability to lock down some preferred versions where I feel that it simply doesn't make sense to let local.conf override. For example, there's usually a LOT more to changing the kernel version for SlugOS than just setting PREFERRED_VERSION. By the time a developer has figured out OE well enough so they can find the distro conf files and understand how they work, then I expect they also understand what extra stuff they need to do for the kernel as well. (Not to mention that I could - and should - add some comments in the distro conf file to explain how that all works, which is something I can't do in a generic local.conf file quite so well.) It's a trivial point; if the community wants to begin to dictate such little nuances to distros, it's not important enough to me to argue. But you asked what the distros think, so I answered. :) -Mike (mwester) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-09 23:15 ` Graham Gower 2010-08-10 7:00 ` Frans Meulenbroeks @ 2010-08-10 20:50 ` Koen Kooi 2010-08-10 20:56 ` Chris Larson 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Koen Kooi @ 2010-08-10 20:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10-08-10 01:15, Graham Gower wrote: > On 10 August 2010 04:31, Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2010/8/9 Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>: >>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Hauser, Wolfgang (external) < >>> Wolfgang.Hauser.external@eads.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I want to change some used versions of packages, so I added a >>>> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>="xxx" for the packages I want to have a >>>> special(newer) version to be used. >>>> >>>> But e. g. for busybox the version defined in the used <distro>.conf is >>>> used instead of my setting in local.conf. >>>> >>>> Should local.conf not overrule <distro/machine>.conf ?? >>> >>> >>> Conceptually, local should override everything, as it's the "most specific" >>> information available, but from a technical standpoint, we can't parse the >>> machine and distro configs until local.conf is parsed, as that's usually >>> where the MACHINE and DISTRO are set. You can use a 'local' override to get >>> around it, or you can ask the distro/machine maintainer to use ?= >>> assignments (set only if unset). >>> >>> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>_local = "xxx" is how you use the override. >> >> The real solution woud be to either temporary store the >> PREFERRED_VERSION and apply it later on. >> Alternately we could parse local.conf twice, the first time ignoring >> the PREFERRED lines, and the 2nd time only looking at these. >> Yet another solution could be to split local.conf into two pieces, one >> with settings like MACHINE and DISTRO, the other one with the >> overrides. > > Wouldn't it be far simpler to fix the distro conf file(s)? E.g. apply > something like this: > s/^PREFERRED_VERSION_\([a-z]*\) =/PREFERRED_VERSION_\1 ?=/ What's the point of setting a preferred version at all if you make it a weak assignment? The distro nearly always knows better and if you want to use a different version, sending a patch to change that version for review isn't exactly rocket science. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFMYbuWMkyGM64RGpERArMuAKCmQ+N+ZFpZv9/s24LYacKaPMLUJwCfaUGs JSGK2aDWhxS1Ii6uVkUGoIQ= =jBaa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-10 20:50 ` Koen Kooi @ 2010-08-10 20:56 ` Chris Larson 2010-08-10 23:44 ` Graham Gower 2010-08-11 5:16 ` Khem Raj 0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Chris Larson @ 2010-08-10 20:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 10-08-10 01:15, Graham Gower wrote: > > On 10 August 2010 04:31, Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> 2010/8/9 Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>: > >>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Hauser, Wolfgang (external) < > >>> Wolfgang.Hauser.external@eads.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hello, > >>>> > >>>> I want to change some used versions of packages, so I added a > >>>> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>="xxx" for the packages I want to have a > >>>> special(newer) version to be used. > >>>> > >>>> But e. g. for busybox the version defined in the used <distro>.conf is > >>>> used instead of my setting in local.conf. > >>>> > >>>> Should local.conf not overrule <distro/machine>.conf ?? > >>> > >>> > >>> Conceptually, local should override everything, as it's the "most > specific" > >>> information available, but from a technical standpoint, we can't parse > the > >>> machine and distro configs until local.conf is parsed, as that's > usually > >>> where the MACHINE and DISTRO are set. You can use a 'local' override > to get > >>> around it, or you can ask the distro/machine maintainer to use ?= > >>> assignments (set only if unset). > >>> > >>> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>_local = "xxx" is how you use the override. > >> > >> The real solution woud be to either temporary store the > >> PREFERRED_VERSION and apply it later on. > >> Alternately we could parse local.conf twice, the first time ignoring > >> the PREFERRED lines, and the 2nd time only looking at these. > >> Yet another solution could be to split local.conf into two pieces, one > >> with settings like MACHINE and DISTRO, the other one with the > >> overrides. > > > > Wouldn't it be far simpler to fix the distro conf file(s)? E.g. apply > > something like this: > > s/^PREFERRED_VERSION_\([a-z]*\) =/PREFERRED_VERSION_\1 ?=/ > > What's the point of setting a preferred version at all if you make it a > weak assignment? > The distro nearly always knows better and if you want to use a different > version, sending a patch to change that version for review isn't exactly > rocket science. How about having decent usability? The user asking for something and not getting it is completely unintuitive. If the user doesn't know what they want, they won't request a specific version. If they do request it, they should get it, anything else is an OE usability issue. -- Christopher Larson clarson at kergoth dot com Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus Maintainer - Tslib Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-10 20:56 ` Chris Larson @ 2010-08-10 23:44 ` Graham Gower 2010-08-11 1:42 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 2010-08-11 5:16 ` Khem Raj 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Graham Gower @ 2010-08-10 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel On 11 August 2010 06:26, Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>wrote: >> What's the point of setting a preferred version at all if you make it a >> weak assignment? >> The distro nearly always knows better and if you want to use a different >> version, sending a patch to change that version for review isn't exactly >> rocket science. > > > How about having decent usability? The user asking for something and not > getting it is completely unintuitive. If the user doesn't know what they > want, they won't request a specific version. If they do request it, they > should get it, anything else is an OE usability issue. Precisely. The user shouldn't have to understand the details of parsing order, weak assignments, etc. in order to write a local.conf which works for them. Patch to follow. -Graham ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-10 23:44 ` Graham Gower @ 2010-08-11 1:42 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 2010-08-11 2:43 ` Graham Gower 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2010-08-11 1:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 09:14:41AM +0930, Graham Gower wrote: > On 11 August 2010 06:26, Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>wrote: > >> What's the point of setting a preferred version at all if you make it a > >> weak assignment? > >> The distro nearly always knows better and if you want to use a different > >> version, sending a patch to change that version for review isn't exactly > >> rocket science. > > > > > > How about having decent usability? The user asking for something and not > > getting it is completely unintuitive. If the user doesn't know what they > > want, they won't request a specific version. If they do request it, they > > should get it, anything else is an OE usability issue. > > Precisely. The user shouldn't have to understand the details of > parsing order, weak assignments, etc. in order to write a local.conf > which works for them. Yeah, and then distro maintainers are blamed for the breakage when users unpin and change specific dependency for a package. It's not just the parsing order problem. It's not clear for users that if they change anything in local.conf, it can break. I.e. you break it - you fix it. -- Denys ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-11 1:42 ` Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2010-08-11 2:43 ` Graham Gower 2010-08-11 3:10 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Graham Gower @ 2010-08-11 2:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel On 11 August 2010 11:12, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 09:14:41AM +0930, Graham Gower wrote: >> On 11 August 2010 06:26, Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>wrote: >> >> What's the point of setting a preferred version at all if you make it a >> >> weak assignment? >> >> The distro nearly always knows better and if you want to use a different >> >> version, sending a patch to change that version for review isn't exactly >> >> rocket science. >> > >> > >> > How about having decent usability? The user asking for something and not >> > getting it is completely unintuitive. If the user doesn't know what they >> > want, they won't request a specific version. If they do request it, they >> > should get it, anything else is an OE usability issue. >> >> Precisely. The user shouldn't have to understand the details of >> parsing order, weak assignments, etc. in order to write a local.conf >> which works for them. > > Yeah, and then distro maintainers are blamed for the breakage when users unpin > and change specific dependency for a package. > > It's not just the parsing order problem. It's not clear for users that if they > change anything in local.conf, it can break. I.e. you break it - you fix it. Ok, I'm not so passionate about this change... But I'd like to highlight why this is not particularly intuitive. My experience has been that only certain image targets will build without overrides in a local.conf. E.g. In order to get gpe-image to build, i needed to set PREFERRED_VERSION_gpsd = "2.39", because prismstumbler doesn't work with the API of newer gpsd versions and prismstumbler is included in the gpe-image. Since no gpsd version was pinned in the distro i was using, this override worked. But then i determined that udev 151 didn't like my old kernel, so I set PREFERRED_VERSION_udev = "141". Only this doesn't work because the (angstrom) distro pins it and the 151 version is silently picked up. I now understand why, but I didn't at the time. So PREFERRED_VERSION_foo="123" might work, or it might not. And the same goes for PREFERRED_PROVIDER_foo, which is actually less consistent because some use a weak assignment in the conf files and others don't. Oh, and where is the ?= operator documented? I would have expected to find it here: http://bitbake.berlios.de/manual/ch02.html -Graham ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-11 2:43 ` Graham Gower @ 2010-08-11 3:10 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2010-08-11 3:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:13:08PM +0930, Graham Gower wrote: > Ok, I'm not so passionate about this change... But I'd like to > highlight why this is not particularly intuitive. > My experience has been that only certain image targets will build > without overrides in a local.conf. > > But then i determined that udev 151 didn't like my old kernel, so I > set PREFERRED_VERSION_udev = "141". Only this doesn't work because > the (angstrom) distro pins it and the 151 version is silently picked > up. I now understand why, but I didn't at the time. Yeah, udev > 141 doesn't like glibc < 2.9 either. > So PREFERRED_VERSION_foo="123" might work, or it might not. And the > same goes for PREFERRED_PROVIDER_foo, which is actually less > consistent because some use a weak assignment in the conf files and > others don't. > > Oh, and where is the ?= operator documented? I would have expected to > find it here: http://bitbake.berlios.de/manual/ch02.html The only place I was able to find it explained is in OpenEmbedded manual under "Conditional assignment" of "Syntax of recipes" chapter: http://docs.openembedded.org/usermanual/html/recipes_syntax.html -- Denys ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-10 20:56 ` Chris Larson 2010-08-10 23:44 ` Graham Gower @ 2010-08-11 5:16 ` Khem Raj 2010-08-11 6:08 ` Frans Meulenbroeks 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Khem Raj @ 2010-08-11 5:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> On 10-08-10 01:15, Graham Gower wrote: >> > On 10 August 2010 04:31, Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> 2010/8/9 Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>: >> >>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Hauser, Wolfgang (external) < >> >>> Wolfgang.Hauser.external@eads.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Hello, >> >>>> >> >>>> I want to change some used versions of packages, so I added a >> >>>> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>="xxx" for the packages I want to have a >> >>>> special(newer) version to be used. >> >>>> >> >>>> But e. g. for busybox the version defined in the used <distro>.conf is >> >>>> used instead of my setting in local.conf. >> >>>> >> >>>> Should local.conf not overrule <distro/machine>.conf ?? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Conceptually, local should override everything, as it's the "most >> specific" >> >>> information available, but from a technical standpoint, we can't parse >> the >> >>> machine and distro configs until local.conf is parsed, as that's >> usually >> >>> where the MACHINE and DISTRO are set. You can use a 'local' override >> to get >> >>> around it, or you can ask the distro/machine maintainer to use ?= >> >>> assignments (set only if unset). >> >>> >> >>> PREFERRED_VERSION_<package>_local = "xxx" is how you use the override. >> >> >> >> The real solution woud be to either temporary store the >> >> PREFERRED_VERSION and apply it later on. >> >> Alternately we could parse local.conf twice, the first time ignoring >> >> the PREFERRED lines, and the 2nd time only looking at these. >> >> Yet another solution could be to split local.conf into two pieces, one >> >> with settings like MACHINE and DISTRO, the other one with the >> >> overrides. >> > >> > Wouldn't it be far simpler to fix the distro conf file(s)? E.g. apply >> > something like this: >> > s/^PREFERRED_VERSION_\([a-z]*\) =/PREFERRED_VERSION_\1 ?=/ >> >> What's the point of setting a preferred version at all if you make it a >> weak assignment? >> The distro nearly always knows better and if you want to use a different >> version, sending a patch to change that version for review isn't exactly >> rocket science. > > > How about having decent usability? The user asking for something and not > getting it is completely unintuitive. If the user doesn't know what they > want, they won't request a specific version. If they do request it, they > should get it, anything else is an OE usability issue. why not use _local override and I think if user want to alter a distro choice I consider that user to be not a beginner. > -- > Christopher Larson > clarson at kergoth dot com > Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus > Maintainer - Tslib > Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-11 5:16 ` Khem Raj @ 2010-08-11 6:08 ` Frans Meulenbroeks 2010-08-11 6:20 ` Martin Jansa 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Frans Meulenbroeks @ 2010-08-11 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel Without quoting tons of text and without going into each individual argument given there are a few remarks I want to give. Things should be consistent and intuitive. local.conf is for local configuration. as such it suggests that whatever is in there is leading. Having to append _local to an override to me is counter-intuitive. (and *if* that is really desired or needed to have a _local suffix, it should be documented clearly in the manual. Also an example should be give in the local.conf.sample file. Afaik neither is the case as of today). Even for a Distro's probably know better what does and does not work together, but in some cases distro's pin recipes for no apparent reason (or personal developer preference). Users should have an easy way to override this, and e.g. select a different version. Also wrt the remark that "distro's know better". The same holds for machines. As a machine maintainer I know probably better than the distro which compiler is best for this machine/architecture. Yet as a machine I am not supposed to pin the version of the compiler. Have fun! Frans ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-11 6:08 ` Frans Meulenbroeks @ 2010-08-11 6:20 ` Martin Jansa 2010-08-11 7:53 ` Hauser, Wolfgang (external) 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Martin Jansa @ 2010-08-11 6:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 08:08:20AM +0200, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > Without quoting tons of text and without going into each individual > argument given there are a few remarks I want to give. > > Things should be consistent and intuitive. > local.conf is for local configuration. as such it suggests that > whatever is in there is leading. > Having to append _local to an override to me is counter-intuitive. > (and *if* that is really desired or needed to have a _local suffix, it > should be documented clearly in the manual. Also an example should be > give in the local.conf.sample file. Afaik neither is the case as of > today). Even for a Somethimes I had to use normal assignment in distro config just to override some previous weak assignment from .inc file included and parsed before in the same distro config. So I would much more appreciate commit updating manual/local.conf.sample than just replacing all distro config with weak-assignments and expecting that nothing changed. Regards, -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-11 6:20 ` Martin Jansa @ 2010-08-11 7:53 ` Hauser, Wolfgang (external) 2010-08-11 8:28 ` Khem Raj 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Hauser, Wolfgang (external) @ 2010-08-11 7:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel Hello, I don't wanted to initiate heavy changes, for my experience: "Don't change a running system". I just asked for a simple way to use my preferred version for specific packages. As I understand OE, it should be possible to use the main repository with some view personal changes to get the image I need. If I have to change distro and machine configurations and hold them in my overlay, I can't use improvements of the main repository w/o heavy changes in my own overlay. For my opinion, a DISTRO only should be a recommendation for a set of working peaces and not a "you have to use it" dictation. There may be individual requirements a DISTRO never will be able to cover. Regards Wolfgang Hauser ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? 2010-08-11 7:53 ` Hauser, Wolfgang (external) @ 2010-08-11 8:28 ` Khem Raj 2010-08-11 9:50 ` Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overruleslocal.conf " Hauser, Wolfgang (external) 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Khem Raj @ 2010-08-11 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:53 AM, Hauser, Wolfgang (external) <Wolfgang.Hauser.external@eads.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I don't wanted to initiate heavy changes, for my experience: "Don't > change a running system". > > I just asked for a simple way to use my preferred version for specific > packages. > > As I understand OE, it should be possible to use the main repository > with some view personal changes to get the image I need. > If I have to change distro and machine configurations and hold them in > my overlay, I can't use improvements of the main repository w/o heavy > changes in my own overlay. > > For my opinion, a DISTRO only should be a recommendation for a set of > working peaces and not a "you have to use it" dictation. > There may be individual requirements a DISTRO never will be able to > cover. well. if you want so many changes to an existing distro then something is wrong with your distro choice. Few changes can be covered as it should be. if local overrides are given so much weight than wait for people asking weird questions and forgetting that they had a change in local.conf. It has happened to me and can happen to anybody. The overrides show problems in very subtle ways sometimes. I think collectively bringing sanity into distros is a good approach and few exceptions can be done using local overrides. I am not in favor of abusing distro's which is what is likely with such an approach. > > Regards > Wolfgang Hauser > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overruleslocal.conf setting ? 2010-08-11 8:28 ` Khem Raj @ 2010-08-11 9:50 ` Hauser, Wolfgang (external) 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Hauser, Wolfgang (external) @ 2010-08-11 9:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel > well. if you want so many changes to an existing distro then something is wrong > with your distro choice. Few changes can be covered as it should be. Don't understand me wrong, a little example what I mean: I want to use some features in busybox the original DISTRO version don't use (and the pinned package don't provide), other features of the original setting I don't need or not allowed to use. Therefore I have to use an overlay containing my needs (just a different defconfig for the needed version of the package). Additionally I need a very minimal busybox configuration for a maintenance system on the same hardware. Therefore I have to use an additional defconfig placed in a different package or overlay. Both are very individual settings and are only flavors of the same version of the busybox package. One way to cover this needs is using different local.conf files containing the different packages I want to use. (setting preferred provider and version). --> needs the leading of local.conf May be can be done by the _local override as suggested, I have to try it. Other way is to create an individual distro or machine configuration in my overlay, which drops me from the improvements of the main repository and I need to cover all sub settings of the source machine or distro settings in my own target distro or machine settings. This procedure is a waste of work and is error-prone in my opinion. A good way may be the handling of different flavors of the same package by supporting sub configurations of the package by creating individual packages with different configurations. Resulting in e. g. busybox-<confx>-x.x.x packages I am able to install in an image. For myself I don't have the knowledge to do such a change in bitbake or OE. Regards Wolfgang Hauser ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-08-11 9:50 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2010-08-09 13:26 Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overrules local.conf setting ? Hauser, Wolfgang (external) 2010-08-09 14:22 ` Chris Larson 2010-08-09 19:01 ` Frans Meulenbroeks 2010-08-09 23:15 ` Graham Gower 2010-08-10 7:00 ` Frans Meulenbroeks 2010-08-11 3:59 ` Mike Westerhof 2010-08-10 20:50 ` Koen Kooi 2010-08-10 20:56 ` Chris Larson 2010-08-10 23:44 ` Graham Gower 2010-08-11 1:42 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 2010-08-11 2:43 ` Graham Gower 2010-08-11 3:10 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 2010-08-11 5:16 ` Khem Raj 2010-08-11 6:08 ` Frans Meulenbroeks 2010-08-11 6:20 ` Martin Jansa 2010-08-11 7:53 ` Hauser, Wolfgang (external) 2010-08-11 8:28 ` Khem Raj 2010-08-11 9:50 ` Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of <distro>.conf overruleslocal.conf " Hauser, Wolfgang (external)
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.