[oe] SRCREV defined too late -how to fix?

[Chris Larson]

On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Mike Westerhof <mike at mwester.net> wrote:

> After a recent commit that rearranged where (and how) SRCREVs are defined,
> building results in:
>
> NOTE: preferred version 2.6.27.8+svnr1 of linux-ixp4xx not available (for
> item kernel)
> NOTE: preferred version 2.6.27.8+svnr1 of linux-ixp4xx not available (for
> item kernel-module-ext2)
> NOTE: preferred version 2.6.27.8+svnr1 of linux-ixp4xx not available (for
> item kernel-module-jbd)
> (etc.)
>
> Note the bogus "svnr1" on the end -- I think this has happened because
> someone changed OE to define SRCREVs in each package.  So now, deep in
> recipes/linux/linux-ixp4xx.inc, we find:
>
> SRCREV = "1089"
>
> I think that's wrong.
>
> It *does* (sort of) work -- it actually results in that SRCREV (1089) being
> built, despite the messages (above) telling you that it can't find the
> PREFERRED_VERSION with SRCREV == 1.
>
> But what that line does is not really what we (the ixp4xx kernel
> maintainers) had in mind.
>
> The idea is that the SRCREV, along with the kernel version, would be
> defined as a preferred version, like this line which is in
> machine/include/ixp4xx.inc:
>
> PREFERRED_VERSION_linux-ixp4xx ?= "2.6.24.7+svnr${SRCREV}"
>
> Of course, SlugOS overrides that because that distro prefers a more recent
> kerrnel:
>
> PREFERRED_VERSION_linux-ixp4xx = "2.6.27.8+svnr${SRCREV}"
>
> That's not really a "recent" kernel, of course -- my local.conf file has a
> more recent one that I've not yet committed.  The point is that the way it
> *USED* to work, one could use the normal means to set both PREFERRED_VERSION
> and SRCREV.  With the recent commit, we can't do that anymore.
>
> Apparently SRCREV isn't defined soon enough with this new structure, so we
> get the messages about svnr1 not being available.  And, of course, one
> cannot override the preferred version anymore due to the use of "=" instead
> of "=?" for the assignment.  (At the very least, when all the SRCREVs were
> moved into the recipes, shouldn't the weak assignments have been preserved?)
>
> At any rate, I wish to remove the bogus messages about svnr1, and I want to
> restore the behavior that would allow me to provide the SRCREV in my
> local.conf.  What is the correct way to do this with the new "world order"
> as it relates to SRCREVs?   To what config file do I move that
> SRCREV="1089"?  Who would I anger if I just put it back to the way it was?


>From what RP was saying on IRC the other day, you can utilize "%" in version
preferences for versions that include srcrev, as a marker.  2.6.27.8+svnr%.
 I haven't looked at that code, though, so I may be completely out in left
field here :)
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics