Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/1] Special debian depends entries

[Henning Schild <henning.schild@siemens.com>]

Am Fri, 15 Dec 2017 09:30:42 +0100
schrieb Claudius Heine <ch@denx.de>:

> On Fri, 2017-12-15 at 09:08 +0100, Claudius Heine wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > here is a new version of my patch done with python code instead of
> > shell
> > code.  
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Henning and me were currently discussing the options here, and we
> might need some referee to decide how to proceed:
> 
> So the options are backwards compatibility vs. avoiding complexity.
> 
> I think this code is not too complex, and backwards compatibility is
> nice to have. We don't know how many people use dpkg-raw and fixing it
> in a backwards compatible way saves time overall.
> 
> Henning thinks that backwards compatibility is not an issue, because
> its easy to fix in the recipes and the complexity that goes with it
> has to be avoided, because there might be bugs inside, and we have to
> fix them over and over.
> 
> Both vaild arguments IMO.

Alex, are you waiting for someone to jump in on this? Maybe you should
just call it and merge one of the two patches.

With the introduction of BASE_APT Isar might have to actually
understand/use the contents of DEBIAN_DEPENDS. And in this case it might
make sense to format it in a way that is bitbake-friendly and stick
with space-separation and the patch Claudius suggested.

Henning
 
> Cheers,
> Claudius
>