[OE-core] [PATCH 4/5] rootfs.py: fix BAD_RECOMMENDATIONS for ipk incremental image generation

[Hongxu Jia]

On 02/18/2014 11:03 PM, Laurentiu Palcu wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 05:42:27PM +0800, Hongxu Jia wrote:
>> While incremental image generation enabled and the previous image existed,
>> if BAD_RECOMMENDATIONS is changed, the operation on the existed image is
>> complicated, so remove the existed image in this situation.
>>
>> The same with PACKAGE_EXCLUDE and NO_RECOMMENDATIONS.
>>
>> [YOCTO #1894]
>> Signed-off-by: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia at windriver.com>
>> ---
>>   meta/lib/oe/rootfs.py | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>   1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/lib/oe/rootfs.py b/meta/lib/oe/rootfs.py
>> index 5561bb9..3d7adf9 100644
>> --- a/meta/lib/oe/rootfs.py
>> +++ b/meta/lib/oe/rootfs.py
>> @@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ class OpkgRootfs(Rootfs):
>>           self.pkg_archs = self.d.getVar("ALL_MULTILIB_PACKAGE_ARCHS", True)
>>   
>>           self.inc_opkg_image_gen = self.d.getVar('INC_IPK_IMAGE_GEN', True)
>> -        if self.inc_opkg_image_gen != "1":
>> +        if self._remove_existed_image():
>>               bb.utils.remove(self.image_rootfs, True)
>>               self.pm = OpkgPM(d,
>>                                self.image_rootfs,
>> @@ -546,6 +546,34 @@ class OpkgRootfs(Rootfs):
>>                   bb.note('incremental removed: %s' % ' '.join(pkg_to_remove))
>>                   self.pm.remove(pkg_to_remove)
>>   
>> +    '''
>> +    Compare with previous (existed) image creation, if some conditions
>> +    triggered, the previous (existed) image should be removed.
>> +    The conditions included any of 'PACKAGE_EXCLUDE, NO_RECOMMENDATIONS
>> +    and BAD_RECOMMENDATIONS' has been changed.
>> +    '''
>> +    def _remove_existed_image(self):
> s/existed/existing/
>
> Also in the comment above.

Sorry for the typo

>
>> +        # Incremental image creation is not enable
>> +        if self.inc_opkg_image_gen != "1":
>> +            return True
>> +
>> +        vars_list_dir = self.d.expand('${T}/vars_list')
> s/vars_list_dir/vars_list_file/ in the line above and the code below.
> Leaving this variable with a 'dir' suffix while we're opening a file for
> reading/writing, is a little misleading.

Sorry for the misleading

V2 incoming

//Hongxu

>> +
>> +        old_vars_list = ""
>> +        if os.path.exists(vars_list_dir):
>> +            old_vars_list = open(vars_list_dir, 'r+').read()
>> +
>> +        new_vars_list = '%s:%s:%s\n' % \
>> +                ((self.d.getVar('BAD_RECOMMENDATIONS', True) or '').strip(),
>> +                 (self.d.getVar('NO_RECOMMENDATIONS', True) or '').strip(),
>> +                 (self.d.getVar('PACKAGE_EXCLUDE', True) or '').strip())
>> +        open(vars_list_dir, 'w+').write(new_vars_list)
>> +
>> +        if old_vars_list != new_vars_list:
>> +            return True
>> +
>> +        return False
>> +
>>       def _create(self):
>>           pkgs_to_install = self.manifest.parse_initial_manifest()
>>           opkg_pre_process_cmds = self.d.getVar('OPKG_PREPROCESS_COMMANDS', True)
>> -- 
>> 1.8.1.2
>>