[oe] [meta-oe][PATCH] smartmontools: import from OE classic

[Martin Jansa]

On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 03:42:30PM +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Friday 03 May 2013 16:30:17 Nicolas Dechesne wrote:
> > On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Koen Kooi <koen at dominion.thruhere.net>wrote:
> > > > I agree we should try to keep only one version of each recipe in
> > > > software
> > > > layers, however I figure it makes it easier for people to carry their
> > > > own
> > > > versions of recipes in distro layers (particularly older, which may be
> > > > required in certain circumstances) if we do keep inc files where they
> > > > already exist.
> >
> > > Can people raise their hand if they want to have a different version of
> > > smartmontools in their layer?
> > 
> > i think it would be nice to have a policy for that. i am going to send a
> > couple of recipes for new components, and it would be good to know what's
> > the agreed 'policy' for .inc file. 
> 
> We probably should have a stated policy, yes. AFAIK the current perhaps 
> unstated policy is to keep the inc file if it existed in OE-Classic.

I don't have strong opinion about keeping/loosing .inc files, but
I've removed couple of .inc files when importing stuff from OE-Classic
in cases where .inc is relatively short (like in smartmontools). 

I would keep .inc when it's reused in different recipes or really
long/complicated (like mesa.inc).

We also have policy that there is only one version per recipe if
possible.

> > in fact, it's not even clear to me why
> > have .inc file is easier to carry different version in distro layers. well
> > it's just a 'large' recipe to carry over..
> 
> If you carry over the whole recipe rather than "require recipes-
> xyz/foo/foo.inc", then you won't get any improvements to the non-version-
> specific parts of the recipe when the base layer updates in the future.
> 
> Alternatively if you "require recipes-xyz/foo/foo_6.5.bb" because there is no 
> .inc, then your recipe will definitely break the next time the recipe in the 
> base layer is upgraded, plus you may have to override more parts of the recipe 
> that are specific to a different version than the one you are building.
> 
> Cheers,
> Paul
> 
> -- 
> 
> Paul Eggleton
> Intel Open Source Technology Centre
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

-- 
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/20130503/f10d061f/attachment-0002.sig>