[oe] BBVERSIONS

[Chris Larson]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:32 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks <
fransmeulenbroeks at gmail.com> wrote:

> Chris, while this is a nice idea it conflicts with having checksums in
> the recipe, as that makes the recipes unique.
> Unless of course there is (or we create) a way to have multiple
> checksums in a recipe and pick the one that is for the version we are
> building.
>

See the gist for nano that I linked in the email, I set it up so that works.
 SRC_URI_<pv> flags are automatically transferred to SRC_URI via an
anonymous python function.  I have a checksums.inc that sets them all.

Then again I feel it is in most cases better to move forward. E.g. for
> your nano example: why would people want to build say nano 1.0.2 if
> there is also a working 1.0.6 recipe (or even a 2.2.3 one or whatever
> version it is at). I feel it is better to spent time to
> fix/improve/add/repair the latest version than spend time fixing old
> code.
> (generally speaking that is)
>

Well, in part I agree, and in part I disagree.  This is why I started this
thread about the worth of the feature.  For companies and the like, keeping
old versions around indefinitely is a good thing, and while I know many will
argue that they can keep their recipes for it around, that just encourages
deviation from OE, and believe me, I know how much of a pain it is for a
company to stay in sync with OE :)

Thanks for the comments.
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics