* [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers @ 2021-08-30 15:37 Michael Opdenacker 2021-08-31 8:19 ` [docs] " Quentin Schulz 2021-08-31 9:16 ` Richard Purdie 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Michael Opdenacker @ 2021-08-30 15:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docs; +Cc: Michael Opdenacker, Robert P . J . Day Fixes [YOCTO #14530] Signed-off-by: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com> Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> --- documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst index f3b5084436..dd015a761e 100644 --- a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst +++ b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst @@ -2114,9 +2114,10 @@ The following lists specific examples of virtual providers: .. note:: - Virtual providers only apply to build time dependencies specified with - :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`. They do not apply to runtime - dependencies specified with :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. + Virtual providers can be applied not only to build time dependencies + specified with :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`, as show in the + example above, but also to runtime dependencies specified with + :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. Properly Versioning Pre-Release Recipes --------------------------------------- -- 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [docs] [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers 2021-08-30 15:37 [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers Michael Opdenacker @ 2021-08-31 8:19 ` Quentin Schulz 2021-08-31 9:16 ` Richard Purdie 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Quentin Schulz @ 2021-08-31 8:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael Opdenacker; +Cc: docs, Robert P . J . Day Hi Michael, On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 05:37:20PM +0200, Michael Opdenacker wrote: > Fixes [YOCTO #14530] > > Signed-off-by: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com> > Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> > --- > documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > index f3b5084436..dd015a761e 100644 > --- a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > +++ b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > @@ -2114,9 +2114,10 @@ The following lists specific examples of virtual providers: > > .. note:: > > - Virtual providers only apply to build time dependencies specified with > - :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`. They do not apply to runtime > - dependencies specified with :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. > + Virtual providers can be applied not only to build time dependencies > + specified with :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`, as show in the > + example above, but also to runtime dependencies specified with > + :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. > I'm not entirely sure what we wanted to tell initially but I feel like the following could be a bit clearer? " Virtual providers can be used not only for build time dependencies (:term:`DEPENDS`) when specified in :term:`PROVIDES`, as shown in the example above, but also for runtime dependencies (:term:`RDEPENDS`) when specified in :term:`RPROVIDES`. " Also wondering if we shouldn't use em dashes instead of commas here. Cheers, Quentin > Properly Versioning Pre-Release Recipes > --------------------------------------- > -- > 2.25.1 > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [docs] [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers 2021-08-30 15:37 [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers Michael Opdenacker 2021-08-31 8:19 ` [docs] " Quentin Schulz @ 2021-08-31 9:16 ` Richard Purdie 2021-08-31 9:49 ` Quentin Schulz 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Richard Purdie @ 2021-08-31 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael Opdenacker, docs; +Cc: Robert P . J . Day On Mon, 2021-08-30 at 17:37 +0200, Michael Opdenacker wrote: > Fixes [YOCTO #14530] > > Signed-off-by: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com> > Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> > --- > documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > index f3b5084436..dd015a761e 100644 > --- a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > +++ b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > @@ -2114,9 +2114,10 @@ The following lists specific examples of virtual providers: > > .. note:: > > - Virtual providers only apply to build time dependencies specified with > - :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`. They do not apply to runtime > - dependencies specified with :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. > + Virtual providers can be applied not only to build time dependencies > + specified with :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`, as show in the > + example above, but also to runtime dependencies specified with > + :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. > This isn't correct. virtual providers of the form virtual/ *only* apply to the build namespace, not the runtime one. Cheers, Richard ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [docs] [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers 2021-08-31 9:16 ` Richard Purdie @ 2021-08-31 9:49 ` Quentin Schulz 2021-08-31 10:01 ` Richard Purdie 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Quentin Schulz @ 2021-08-31 9:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard Purdie; +Cc: Michael Opdenacker, docs, Robert P . J . Day On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 10:16:49AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Mon, 2021-08-30 at 17:37 +0200, Michael Opdenacker wrote: > > Fixes [YOCTO #14530] > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com> > > Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> > > --- > > documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst | 7 ++++--- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > > index f3b5084436..dd015a761e 100644 > > --- a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > > +++ b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > > @@ -2114,9 +2114,10 @@ The following lists specific examples of virtual providers: > > > > .. note:: > > > > - Virtual providers only apply to build time dependencies specified with > > - :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`. They do not apply to runtime > > - dependencies specified with :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. > > + Virtual providers can be applied not only to build time dependencies > > + specified with :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`, as show in the > > + example above, but also to runtime dependencies specified with > > + :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. > > > > This isn't correct. virtual providers of the form virtual/ *only* apply to the > build namespace, not the runtime one. > What is the mechanism behind RPROVIDES:${PN} then? You could technically set it to "virtual/something" right? How Bitbake chooses between two recipes creating a package RPROVIDES'ing the same "virtual/something" is something I have no knowledge in but I feel like it's something that should be explained here, or at least explicit why it does not apply to runtime dependencies or point to where the providers for runtime dependencies are explained in the docs. Cheers, Quentin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [docs] [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers 2021-08-31 9:49 ` Quentin Schulz @ 2021-08-31 10:01 ` Richard Purdie 2021-08-31 16:56 ` Michael Opdenacker 2021-09-01 12:16 ` Quentin Schulz 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Richard Purdie @ 2021-08-31 10:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Quentin Schulz; +Cc: Michael Opdenacker, docs, Robert P . J . Day On Tue, 2021-08-31 at 11:49 +0200, Quentin Schulz wrote: > On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 10:16:49AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Mon, 2021-08-30 at 17:37 +0200, Michael Opdenacker wrote: > > > Fixes [YOCTO #14530] > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com> > > > Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> > > > --- > > > documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst | 7 ++++--- > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > > > index f3b5084436..dd015a761e 100644 > > > --- a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > > > +++ b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > > > @@ -2114,9 +2114,10 @@ The following lists specific examples of virtual providers: > > > > > > .. note:: > > > > > > - Virtual providers only apply to build time dependencies specified with > > > - :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`. They do not apply to runtime > > > - dependencies specified with :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. > > > + Virtual providers can be applied not only to build time dependencies > > > + specified with :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`, as show in the > > > + example above, but also to runtime dependencies specified with > > > + :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. > > > > > > > This isn't correct. virtual providers of the form virtual/ *only* apply to the > > build namespace, not the runtime one. > > > > What is the mechanism behind RPROVIDES:${PN} then? You could technically > set it to "virtual/something" right? There is no mechanism and whilst you could set it to that, it wouldn't do anything useful. > How Bitbake chooses between two recipes creating a package RPROVIDES'ing the > same "virtual/something" is something I have no knowledge in You don't set that. It doesn't work. It isn't supported. This is what that manual section is trying to say. Making the manual pretend it does doesn't change this. > but I feel like it's something that > should be explained here, or at least explicit why it does not apply to > runtime dependencies or point to where the providers for runtime > dependencies are explained in the docs. I've explained this many times before but let me try once again. Bitbake is the interpreter of DEPENDS and PROVIDES and it can see multiple providers and choose between them. We have full control over that piece of the process. Bitbake picks the combination it thinks the user wants and then bakes it into the task graph. For any given configuration, one task graph should result. The runtime namespace is quite different. RPROVIDES are written into the packages and they are interpreted by the package managers. We have no way to tell the package manager that when it sees "virtual/shell", it should be bash. It would be something different for each package manager and at best it is badly supported by the distros and packaging backends (e.g. dpkg-reconfigure). We've therefore not gone there. It is understandable the user still needs to make some choices in OE. These are the VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_xxxx variables. These are the virtual/ equivalent from DEPENDS/PROVIDES. The distro hardcodes values of things for the VIRTUAL- RUNTIME_xxx variables. This is to try and make it clear these are not like virtual/ and do not respect PREFERRED_PROVIDER. The selections are hardcoded into packages as they are built. VIRTUAL-RUNTIME is ugly and it is an OE thing, not a bitbake one, there is nothing related to it in bitbake. This does make it harder to document. I'd love something nicer but we've never found a way to make it work reliably with the package managers, deterministic builds and all our other constraints. Cheers, Richard ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [docs] [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers 2021-08-31 10:01 ` Richard Purdie @ 2021-08-31 16:56 ` Michael Opdenacker 2021-08-31 16:58 ` Richard Purdie 2021-09-01 12:16 ` Quentin Schulz 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Michael Opdenacker @ 2021-08-31 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard Purdie, Quentin Schulz; +Cc: docs, Robert P . J . Day Hi Richard, On 8/31/21 12:01 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > >> How Bitbake chooses between two recipes creating a package RPROVIDES'ing the >> same "virtual/something" is something I have no knowledge in > You don't set that. It doesn't work. It isn't supported. This is what that > manual section is trying to say. Making the manual pretend it does doesn't > change this. > >> but I feel like it's something that >> should be explained here, or at least explicit why it does not apply to >> runtime dependencies or point to where the providers for runtime >> dependencies are explained in the docs. > I've explained this many times before but let me try once again. > > Bitbake is the interpreter of DEPENDS and PROVIDES and it can see multiple > providers and choose between them. We have full control over that piece of the > process. > > Bitbake picks the combination it thinks the user wants and then bakes it into > the task graph. For any given configuration, one task graph should result. > > The runtime namespace is quite different. RPROVIDES are written into the > packages and they are interpreted by the package managers. We have no way to > tell the package manager that when it sees "virtual/shell", it should be bash. > It would be something different for each package manager and at best it is badly > supported by the distros and packaging backends (e.g. dpkg-reconfigure). We've > therefore not gone there. Thank you for the clarification. I got confused by the below definitions in recipes: poky$ git grep virtual | grep RDEPENDS meta/recipes-bsp/grub/grub-efi_2.06.bb:RDEPENDS:${PN} = "grub-common virtual/grub-bootconf" meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd-boot_249.3.bb:RDEPENDS:${PN} += "virtual/systemd-bootconf" poky$ git grep virtual | grep RPROVIDES meta/recipes-bsp/grub/grub-bootconf_1.00.bb:RPROVIDES:${PN} += "virtual/grub-bootconf" meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc-package.inc:RPROVIDES:${PN}-dev = "eglibc-dev libc6-dev virtual-libc-dev" meta/recipes-core/musl/musl_git.bb:RPROVIDES:${PN}-dev += "libc-dev virtual-libc-dev" meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd-bootconf_1.00.bb:RPROVIDES:${PN} += "virtual/systemd-bootconf" In these cases, if I understand correctly, "virtual/xxx" are just regular strings with no special meaning that the package managers will use, right? Should such packages avoid the use of "virtual/" RPROVIDES? Thanks again, Michael. -- Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [docs] [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers 2021-08-31 16:56 ` Michael Opdenacker @ 2021-08-31 16:58 ` Richard Purdie 2021-08-31 17:09 ` Michael Opdenacker 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Richard Purdie @ 2021-08-31 16:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael Opdenacker, Quentin Schulz; +Cc: docs, Robert P . J . Day On Tue, 2021-08-31 at 18:56 +0200, Michael Opdenacker wrote: > Hi Richard, > > On 8/31/21 12:01 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > > > > How Bitbake chooses between two recipes creating a package RPROVIDES'ing the > > > same "virtual/something" is something I have no knowledge in > > You don't set that. It doesn't work. It isn't supported. This is what that > > manual section is trying to say. Making the manual pretend it does doesn't > > change this. > > > > > but I feel like it's something that > > > should be explained here, or at least explicit why it does not apply to > > > runtime dependencies or point to where the providers for runtime > > > dependencies are explained in the docs. > > I've explained this many times before but let me try once again. > > > > Bitbake is the interpreter of DEPENDS and PROVIDES and it can see multiple > > providers and choose between them. We have full control over that piece of the > > process. > > > > Bitbake picks the combination it thinks the user wants and then bakes it into > > the task graph. For any given configuration, one task graph should result. > > > > The runtime namespace is quite different. RPROVIDES are written into the > > packages and they are interpreted by the package managers. We have no way to > > tell the package manager that when it sees "virtual/shell", it should be bash. > > It would be something different for each package manager and at best it is badly > > supported by the distros and packaging backends (e.g. dpkg-reconfigure). We've > > therefore not gone there. > > Thank you for the clarification. I got confused by the below definitions > in recipes: > > poky$ git grep virtual | grep RDEPENDS > meta/recipes-bsp/grub/grub-efi_2.06.bb:RDEPENDS:${PN} = "grub-common > virtual/grub-bootconf" > meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd-boot_249.3.bb:RDEPENDS:${PN} += > "virtual/systemd-bootconf" > > poky$ git grep virtual | grep RPROVIDES > meta/recipes-bsp/grub/grub-bootconf_1.00.bb:RPROVIDES:${PN} += > "virtual/grub-bootconf" > meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc-package.inc:RPROVIDES:${PN}-dev = > "eglibc-dev libc6-dev virtual-libc-dev" > meta/recipes-core/musl/musl_git.bb:RPROVIDES:${PN}-dev += "libc-dev > virtual-libc-dev" > meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd-bootconf_1.00.bb:RPROVIDES:${PN} += > "virtual/systemd-bootconf" > > In these cases, if I understand correctly, "virtual/xxx" are just > regular strings with no special meaning that the package managers will > use, right? Should such packages avoid the use of "virtual/" RPROVIDES? The virtual/xxx should not be there and yes, are just strings. Cheers, Richard ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [docs] [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers 2021-08-31 16:58 ` Richard Purdie @ 2021-08-31 17:09 ` Michael Opdenacker 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Michael Opdenacker @ 2021-08-31 17:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard Purdie, Quentin Schulz; +Cc: docs, Robert P . J . Day On 8/31/21 6:58 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > >> Thank you for the clarification. I got confused by the below definitions >> in recipes: >> >> poky$ git grep virtual | grep RDEPENDS >> meta/recipes-bsp/grub/grub-efi_2.06.bb:RDEPENDS:${PN} = "grub-common >> virtual/grub-bootconf" >> meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd-boot_249.3.bb:RDEPENDS:${PN} += >> "virtual/systemd-bootconf" >> >> poky$ git grep virtual | grep RPROVIDES >> meta/recipes-bsp/grub/grub-bootconf_1.00.bb:RPROVIDES:${PN} += >> "virtual/grub-bootconf" >> meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc-package.inc:RPROVIDES:${PN}-dev = >> "eglibc-dev libc6-dev virtual-libc-dev" >> meta/recipes-core/musl/musl_git.bb:RPROVIDES:${PN}-dev += "libc-dev >> virtual-libc-dev" >> meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd-bootconf_1.00.bb:RPROVIDES:${PN} += >> "virtual/systemd-bootconf" >> >> In these cases, if I understand correctly, "virtual/xxx" are just >> regular strings with no special meaning that the package managers will >> use, right? Should such packages avoid the use of "virtual/" RPROVIDES? > The virtual/xxx should not be there and yes, are just strings. Thanks for confirming this. What about replacing then "virtual/" by "virtual-" as already done in "virtual-libc-dev" above? Cheers Michael. -- Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [docs] [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers 2021-08-31 10:01 ` Richard Purdie 2021-08-31 16:56 ` Michael Opdenacker @ 2021-09-01 12:16 ` Quentin Schulz 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Quentin Schulz @ 2021-09-01 12:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard Purdie; +Cc: Michael Opdenacker, docs, Robert P . J . Day On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 11:01:33AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2021-08-31 at 11:49 +0200, Quentin Schulz wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 10:16:49AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > > > On Mon, 2021-08-30 at 17:37 +0200, Michael Opdenacker wrote: > > > > Fixes [YOCTO #14530] > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com> > > > > Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> > > > > --- > > > > documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst | 7 ++++--- > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > > > > index f3b5084436..dd015a761e 100644 > > > > --- a/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > > > > +++ b/documentation/dev-manual/common-tasks.rst > > > > @@ -2114,9 +2114,10 @@ The following lists specific examples of virtual providers: > > > > > > > > .. note:: > > > > > > > > - Virtual providers only apply to build time dependencies specified with > > > > - :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`. They do not apply to runtime > > > > - dependencies specified with :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. > > > > + Virtual providers can be applied not only to build time dependencies > > > > + specified with :term:`PROVIDES` and :term:`DEPENDS`, as show in the > > > > + example above, but also to runtime dependencies specified with > > > > + :term:`RPROVIDES` and :term:`RDEPENDS`. > > > > > > > > > > This isn't correct. virtual providers of the form virtual/ *only* apply to the > > > build namespace, not the runtime one. > > > > > > > What is the mechanism behind RPROVIDES:${PN} then? You could technically > > set it to "virtual/something" right? > > There is no mechanism and whilst you could set it to that, it wouldn't do > anything useful. > > > How Bitbake chooses between two recipes creating a package RPROVIDES'ing the > > same "virtual/something" is something I have no knowledge in > > You don't set that. It doesn't work. It isn't supported. This is what that > manual section is trying to say. Making the manual pretend it does doesn't > change this. > > > but I feel like it's something that > > should be explained here, or at least explicit why it does not apply to > > runtime dependencies or point to where the providers for runtime > > dependencies are explained in the docs. > > I've explained this many times before but let me try once again. > > Bitbake is the interpreter of DEPENDS and PROVIDES and it can see multiple > providers and choose between them. We have full control over that piece of the > process. > > Bitbake picks the combination it thinks the user wants and then bakes it into > the task graph. For any given configuration, one task graph should result. > > The runtime namespace is quite different. RPROVIDES are written into the > packages and they are interpreted by the package managers. We have no way to > tell the package manager that when it sees "virtual/shell", it should be bash. > It would be something different for each package manager and at best it is badly > supported by the distros and packaging backends (e.g. dpkg-reconfigure). We've > therefore not gone there. > > It is understandable the user still needs to make some choices in OE. These are > the VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_xxxx variables. These are the virtual/ equivalent from > DEPENDS/PROVIDES. The distro hardcodes values of things for the VIRTUAL- > RUNTIME_xxx variables. This is to try and make it clear these are not like > virtual/ and do not respect PREFERRED_PROVIDER. The selections are hardcoded > into packages as they are built. > > VIRTUAL-RUNTIME is ugly and it is an OE thing, not a bitbake one, there is > nothing related to it in bitbake. This does make it harder to document. > > I'd love something nicer but we've never found a way to make it work reliably > with the package managers, deterministic builds and all our other constraints. > Thanks so much for having taken the time to answer :) I want to link to the IRC log here because I continued this discussion on IRC with Richard, please see: https://www.yoctoproject.org/irc/%23yocto.2021-09-01.log.html#t2021-09-01T11:55:01 Cheers, Quentin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-09-01 12:16 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2021-08-30 15:37 [PATCH] dev-manual: correct note about virtual providers Michael Opdenacker 2021-08-31 8:19 ` [docs] " Quentin Schulz 2021-08-31 9:16 ` Richard Purdie 2021-08-31 9:49 ` Quentin Schulz 2021-08-31 10:01 ` Richard Purdie 2021-08-31 16:56 ` Michael Opdenacker 2021-08-31 16:58 ` Richard Purdie 2021-08-31 17:09 ` Michael Opdenacker 2021-09-01 12:16 ` Quentin Schulz
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.