[oe] [RFC, PATCH] Add minver/maxver to patch.bbclass, update bluez

[Tom Rini]

On 04/25/2011 01:14 PM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 2011/4/25 Tom Rini <tom_rini at mentor.com>
> 
>> Hey all,
>>
>> In digging at some other bluez problems, I found that at least
>> 4.91 no longer needs the sbc-thumb patch.  But without moving it to the
>> N versions of bluez4 we have or starting a new inc file for later bluez4
>> versions, there wasn't a clean way to exclude the patch.  Until now.
>> Borrowing the minrev/maxrev logic I added minver/maxver patch params
>> and tested them lightly (the patch is applied on 4.89 and not on
>> 4.91).  I'm cc'ing Koen here because patch #3 adds 4.91 and make it
>> default for Angstrom, but all I've done myself is build testing.
>> It should be safe, based on upstream changelog tho.
>>
>> First question should probably be: do we need 9 versions of bluez4? This is
> not too much in line with the version policy the TSC once stipulated and
> seems also different from the road oe-core and meta-oe are taking.

For bluez4 we could probably drop out 4.31, 4.41 (4.43 seems to
introduce some startup changes that might require folks to opt-in) and
then all of the post ones until 4.91, since shr and angstrom would both
depend on that.  I'd be happy to do that as a follow-up.

> Also personally I'm not too keen on minrev/maxrev. It only makes things
> again a little bit more complicated.
> My preference would be to remove the patch from the .inc file and move to
> the individual bb files

Well, maybe the better answer is a re-worked series to drop out a number
of older versions, and then it won't be bad to have the patch in a the
bb files..  Need to think about this.

> My 2 cents.
> 
> Frans
> 
> PS: two more cents: it seems somewhat odd that some distro's have a DP = 1
> for more than one version of a recipe. While technically not wrong this
> looks a little bit odd.
> Also we seem to have two mechanisms to select a version for a distro. One is
> the DP_distro mechanism the other one is the PREFERRED_VERSION_recipe in the
> conf file
> It seems to me one should be sufficient

Well, this is in part something the oe-core/meta-oe/etc policy will help
with since it does have a planned phasing out / removal of the old
version, so we would have less in the way of "add the latest .z release
and .z-1 through .z-5 just stick around).

-- 
Tom Rini
Mentor Graphics Corporation