[OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] autoconf-archive: inherit allarch and fix package splitting

[Burton, Ross]

But don't we remove the old version from the feeds, or does that only
happen if the arch matches?

Ross

On 14 November 2017 at 10:16, André Draszik <git at andred.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 2017-11-13 at 19:54 +0800, Robert Yang wrote:
> >
> > On 11/13/2017 04:54 PM, André Draszik wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2017-11-13 at 13:26 +0800, Chen Qi wrote:
> > > > autoconf-archive is a set of common m4 macros, it should be allarch,
> > > > just like it is on other distros.
> > >
> > > I have found previously that when changing a recipe to produce more
> > > generic
> > > output, like in this case, and the old binary package is still in
> > > deploy/,
> > > then the package manager would always pick the more specific version,
> > > even
> > > if a more recent (by package version) exists in deploy. In my case I
> was
> > > moving from PACKAGE_ARCH=${MACHINE_ARCH} to
> > > PACKAGE_ARCH=${TUNE_PKGARCH},
> > > but I guess it'll be the same here.
> >
> > I think that it is because of the priority MACHINE_ARCH > TUNE_PKGARCH >
> > allarch,
> > which is the right behavior.
>
> I'd say this patch here is a good example why it's not the right behaviour.
>
> This patch is making autoconf-archive allarch, i.e. lower priority than
> before. In other words, anybody who has the previous TUNE_PKGARCH version
> already will never get an update, even if the version number is bumped.
>
> Cheers,
> Andre'
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20171114/a124de90/attachment-0002.html>