[oe] [OE-core] Bitbake distro packages: kill them with fire

[Martin Jansa]

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> These might not be the appropiate lists, but I might reach a few of the culprits. Over the years people have been doing 'apt get install bitbake' or 'make install' to put bitbake into /usr/bin and after a few minutes to get on irc/email/etc to complain that everything is suddenly broken. There are checks for bitbake versions in the metadata, but it can (and will!) still break with due to python path nastiness.
> 
> So to every person packaging bitbake for their distro: stop doing that!
> 
> If someone has a better suggestion to avoid this problem (more documentation doesn't work), please speak up.

I was using bitbake from Gentoo for long time (they provide also live
ebuilds) and it worked fine. I was using packaged version mostly to
control which version gets installed to shr-chroot (sometimes with extra
patches, sometimes holding on older version until shr metadata were
compatible).

Now I switched back to bitbake checkout with revision locked by setup
scripts to make life easier for people using my setup scripts but
without shr-chroot option.

So I don't mind if people stop doing bitbake packages :).

Cheers,

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/attachments/20120829/e447518c/attachment-0002.sig>