Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] u-boot regression fix, cleanup restoration

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>]

On 26.11.18 11:16, Henning Schild wrote:
> Am Mon, 26 Nov 2018 10:49:53 +0100
> schrieb Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>:
> 
>> On 26.11.18 10:47, Henning Schild wrote:
>>> Did you try putting MACHINE into PV and pinning on that? It is
>>> always the same package and multiple versions are .... multiple
>>> versions.
>>
>> That won't fly. We want recipes to generate results that be be
>> exchanged (u-boot-myboard either from u-boot mainline or from some
>> vendor recipe).
> 
> Could you explain the problem in more detail? I do not understand the
> issue yet. I know the pattern comes from multiconfig conflicts you have
> found in jailhouse-images ... but messing with PN at runtime just
> sounds like a very bad idea. I am not surprised that uncovered a
> bitbake bug ....

This recipe is not messing with PN, neither before not after your patch. It is 
just defining its output package names independently of the PN. E.g., we have 
u-boot_xxx.bb as recipe to build packages from upstream U-Boot sources. Those 
shall carry the same, stable names as package built by some 
u-boot-downstream_xxx.bb which use a downstream source repo. That allows to 
switch providers by just defining PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot-<machine>. Your 
patch would enforce to change also all recipes that pull that target. That's not 
desirable (and broke jailhouse-images as a pioneer user).

Jan

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