[OE-core] [PATCH 2/2] kernel: user defined KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME

[Bruce Ashfield]

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 5:15 AM, Razvan Heghedus <razvan.heghedus at ni.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On 06/26/2017 06:52 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Heghedus Razvan <razvan.heghedus at ni.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Add possibility to set KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME to a user
>> defined value.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Heghedus Razvan <razvan.heghedus at ni.com>
>> ---
>>  meta/classes/kernel.bbclass | 8 ++++++--
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass b/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass
>> index 605c101e62..02728d5a86 100644
>> --- a/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass
>> +++ b/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass
>> @@ -28,12 +28,16 @@ INITRAMFS_IMAGE_BUNDLE ?= ""
>>  # LINUX_VERSION which is a constant.
>>  KERNEL_VERSION_NAME = "${@d.getVar('KERNEL_VERSION') or "
>> <$%7B at d.getVar('KERNEL_VERSION')or>"}"
>>  KERNEL_VERSION_NAME[vardepvalue] = "${LINUX_VERSION}"
>> -KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME = "${@legitimize_package_name(d.
>> getVar('KERNEL_VERSION'))}"
>> -KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME[vardepvalue] = "${LINUX_VERSION}"
>>
>>  python __anonymous () {
>>      import re
>>
>> +    if d.getVar('USER_KERNEL_VERSION_PKG') is None :
>> +        d.setVar('KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME',
>> "${@legitimize_package_name(d.getVar('KERNEL_VERSION'))}")
>> +        d.setVar('KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME[vardepvalue]',
>> "${LINUX_VERSION}")
>> +    else:
>> +        d.setVar('KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME',
>> "${@legitimize_package_name(d.getVar('USER_KERNEL_VERSION_PKG'))}")
>>
>
> This is introducing yet another variable that tweaks the already complex
> setting of
> the kernel version. Not to mention this code is already touchy with
> respect to
> parse time and rebuilding of the kernel.
>
> My concern is that if this is set, we are completely disassociated with
> the source
> code of the kernel.
>
> Where did you think this would be set ? local.conf ? distro config ?
> somewhere else ?
>
> If we had a way to simply override KERNEL_VERSION, we wouldn't need any
> extra
> variables.
>
> Bruce
>
>
>> +
>>      # Merge KERNEL_IMAGETYPE and KERNEL_ALT_IMAGETYPE into
>> KERNEL_IMAGETYPES
>>      type = d.getVar('KERNEL_IMAGETYPE') or ""
>>      alttype = d.getVar('KERNEL_ALT_IMAGETYPE') or ""
>> --
>> 2.13.1
>>
>> --
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>> Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>>
>
>
>
> --
> "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee
> at its end"
>
> I have setting the variable in the kernel recipe. I need a way to override
> the KERNEL_VERSION because I want the kernel packages name to contain only
> a part of the version or nothing at all.
> I need this for the the kernel upgrade stuff, because if the package name
> is something like: kernel-4.9.8-{static_string} then I couldn't upgrade to
> a version like: kernel-4.9.10-{static_string}, because they are two
> different packages. I wanted a simple way to be able to have the package
> name : kernel-4.9-{static_string}, then I could do the upgrade for the new
> minor updates of the kernel.
>

I could have sworn this (upgrading) was already possible via the version
string we
are currently using.  i.e. the PV is already picked up from the kernel
source, and
that should be doing the job.

i.e. when I unpack my
kernel-image-bzimage-4.10.15-yocto-standard_4.10.15+git0+4d929fac34_d2c1ed3c0c-r0_qemux86_64.ipk
package, I see that it has:

 Version: 4.10.15+git0+4d929fac34_d2c1ed3c0c-r0
 but obviously has the general provides: Provides: kernel-image-bzimage

So that should be upgradable based on the version ... sure they have
different names, but the provides
and versions take care of things.

The versioning, ability to install multiple kernels, upgrades, etc, have
really churned
these variables making them a mess to read.

I'm probably misunderstanding your use case and error, can you elaborate
for me
and/or provide a log ? I'm more of a kernel guy than a package format guy
.. so
I'm probably missing something obvious.

Bruce



>
> This was the simple and cleanest way I could think of to achieve the my
> scenario. But if there is a better idea for this, let me know.
>
> --
>
> Razvan
>
>


-- 
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee
at its end"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20170627/57a35727/attachment-0002.html>