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

[Alexander Smirnov <asmirnov@ilbers.de>]

Hi all,

On 01/03/2018 07:08 PM, Henning Schild wrote:
> 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.
>>

In my opinion backward compatibility is not so critical for current 
implementation, especially because current DEBIAN_DEPENDS is a bit 
'inconsistent' due to missed version specificators. So in theory in some 
environment the build could failed due to invalid apt version. Therefor 
I'd prefer to force Isar users to fix their recipes now.

>> 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.

Working on base-apt I've faced with the problem how to get dependency 
tree for current build. So atm I'm thinking about generalization of 
DEBIAN_DEPENDS variable and moving this code (patching debian/control) 
to dpkg-base class.

Do you think it makes sense for now?

> 
> 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.
> 

base-apt is created using multistrap, so it's a good question which 
input format multistrap accepts. Probably no one from proposed formats 
will work as it is.

Alex

> Henning
>   
>> Cheers,
>> Claudius
>>
>