dpkg-base.bbclass: Mistake in stamp name?

dpkg-base.bbclass: Mistake in stamp name?

[Jan Kiszka]

addtask deploy_deb after do_build
do_deploy_deb[stamp-extra-info] = "${DISTRO}-${MACHINE}"

Shouldn't this be "${DISTRO}-${DISTRO_ARCH}"?

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA IOT SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux

Re: dpkg-base.bbclass: Mistake in stamp name?

[Alexander Smirnov]

On 02/14/2018 06:56 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> addtask deploy_deb after do_build
> do_deploy_deb[stamp-extra-info] = "${DISTRO}-${MACHINE}"
> 
> Shouldn't this be "${DISTRO}-${DISTRO_ARCH}"?

Huh, good finding. IIRC initially there was issue with RPi and qemuarm. 
Both of these boards have the same ${DISTRO_ARCH}.

1. Initially Isar supported only one Debian distribution, so to 
distinguish stamps between machines, the ${MACHINE} suffix was used.

2. Then another distribution was added, but there was no split in 
${TMPDIR} like you see now, ${WORKDIRS} were split by distro or arch 
name only, so RPi and qemuarm had shared working directory.

3. Some tasks were shared for example do_unpack for qemuarm and rpi, but 
some tasks like do_build and do_deploy should run per-machine.

4. Some stamps were fixed after splitting of ${TMPDIR}, seems this one 
was missed.

For now I guess this makes no sense, we have complete split of 
workspaces in ${TMPDIR}. So "${DISTRO}-${DISTRO_ARCH}" could be used.


But your question pointed me to another topic:

1. We have two armhf boards, let's say Rpi1 and RPi2.

2. I want two Jessie images for this boards.

3. How we should process them in Isar? With current layout the only one 
configuration will be compiled. How kernel packages should be distinguished?

Alex

Re: dpkg-base.bbclass: Mistake in stamp name?

[Jan Kiszka]

On 2018-02-14 18:10, Alexander Smirnov wrote:
> On 02/14/2018 06:56 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> addtask deploy_deb after do_build
>> do_deploy_deb[stamp-extra-info] = "${DISTRO}-${MACHINE}"
>>
>> Shouldn't this be "${DISTRO}-${DISTRO_ARCH}"?
> 
> Huh, good finding. IIRC initially there was issue with RPi and qemuarm.
> Both of these boards have the same ${DISTRO_ARCH}.
> 
> 1. Initially Isar supported only one Debian distribution, so to
> distinguish stamps between machines, the ${MACHINE} suffix was used.
> 
> 2. Then another distribution was added, but there was no split in
> ${TMPDIR} like you see now, ${WORKDIRS} were split by distro or arch
> name only, so RPi and qemuarm had shared working directory.
> 
> 3. Some tasks were shared for example do_unpack for qemuarm and rpi, but
> some tasks like do_build and do_deploy should run per-machine.
> 
> 4. Some stamps were fixed after splitting of ${TMPDIR}, seems this one
> was missed.
> 
> For now I guess this makes no sense, we have complete split of
> workspaces in ${TMPDIR}. So "${DISTRO}-${DISTRO_ARCH}" could be used.
> 

OK, will send the patch I already have queued up.

> 
> But your question pointed me to another topic:
> 
> 1. We have two armhf boards, let's say Rpi1 and RPi2.
> 
> 2. I want two Jessie images for this boards.
> 
> 3. How we should process them in Isar? With current layout the only one
> configuration will be compiled. How kernel packages should be
> distinguished?

See my new KERNEL_NAME which can be set in the related multiconfig
files. Should work fine.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA IOT SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux