[oe] Kernel recipes with broken PRs now

[Leon Woestenberg]

Hello,

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Phil Blundell <philb at gnu.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 15:06 +0200, Leon Woestenberg wrote:
>> Why would a machine or local.conf want to force rebuild by increasing
>> this MACHINE_KERNEL_PR variable??
>
> I think the idea is to rebuild all the module binaries if the kernel
> configuration changes in some incompatible way.  However, this does seem
>
First concern; why would we want to achieve a rebuild on a changed
configuration for the kernel?

We do not support this for other packages, and if we do, we do this in
the regular way by incrementing PR for a new build recipe.

> like a curious way of achieving it; I would have thought that the
> existing "kernel-abiversion" mechanism, or some extension of that, would
> solve the problem without the need to introduce a new user-controlled
> global variable.
>
I found the construction strange to say the least.

My main concern: I think we should simplify OpenEmbedded, not hack it
kaput with strange constructs like these.

> It does also seem fairly unfortunate that, judging from the first mail
> in this thread, the patch in question has been landed in such a way as
> to effectively (and silently) rewind PR to r0 for any kernel packages
> that haven't been specifically adapted to work with it.
>
Marcin wrote a patch that solves this.

However, I wonder where this is going?

Regards,
-- 
Leon