2021. 08. 23. 15:38 keltezéssel, Bruce Ashfield írta:
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 9:30 AM Böszörményi Zoltán <zbos...@pr.hu> wrote:
2021. 08. 23. 15:03 keltezéssel, Bruce Ashfield írta:
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 8:23 AM Zoltan Boszormenyi via
lists.openembedded.org <zboszor=pr...@lists.openembedded.org> wrote:
From: Zoltán Böszörményi <zbos...@gmail.com>
Some Yocto users do use package repositories and sometimes the PR
value is forgotten. Use full versions for inter-package dependencies
for the kernel subpackages.
Can you expand this commit message ?
I will send a new version with the expanded message.
What is the observable problem
with the full versions not being in the rdpends ?
Currently the kernel creates such subpackages:
kernel
kernel-x.y.z
kernel-image-x.y.z
kernel-image-bzimage-x.y.z
kernel-modules-x.y.z
and in the split modules case, a lot of
kernel-module-*-x.y.z
RDEPENDS currently only references the package names.
The issue I observe is this: I have enabled kernel module signing
but I don't provide a key, so the kernel will generate one at
every rebuild.
You get the idea what problem this can make if there's a
rebuild:
x.y.z-r0.0 -> x.y.z-r1.0 (in which case the PR value was duly changed)
or
x.y.z-r0.0 -> x.y.z-r0.1 (where not)
It's actually indifferent, but the same issue occurs if
only the kernel-image-bzimage is upgraded: the modules either
won't work or taint the kernel.
Your second example is similar to the times I've seen some module
issues as well, and honestly, I can't recall if it was solved in a
similar way to this (I don't have access to my old repos from Wind
River any more).
But that does make sense to me, and the details you have in this
follow up, make a nice commit explanation.
While opkg may not handle the situation you describe as well as RPM,
we should make sure that the full version doesn't cause issues with
the package generation or standard image creation.
You can bet it doesn't. I have the same patch in a Sumo-based distro
where we still use ipk and opkg and there's no issue in either image
generation or package upgrades. Only that there's no "installonly"
knowledge in opkg (unlike dnf) so old kernel packages have to be
manually cleaned up there.
Cheers,
Bruce
This scenario is currently valid in the package manager because
of the versionless RDEPENDS.
I've run many different package feeds with different kernels and
modules, and haven't run into anything on this front, in my experience
the extended version in the package depends/provides causes issues
with some package managers .. so we'd need the testing for this
documented/provided so we could ensure that there are no hidden
issues.
Bruce
Signed-off-by: Zoltán Böszörményi <zbos...@gmail.com>
---
meta/classes/kernel.bbclass | 13 +++++++------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass b/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass
index 6dc5387a9b..9ec7daa17a 100644
--- a/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass
+++ b/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass
@@ -91,17 +91,18 @@ python __anonymous () {
kname = d.getVar('KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME') or "kernel"
imagedest = d.getVar('KERNEL_IMAGEDEST')
+ fullver = d.getVar('EXTENDPKGV')
for type in types.split():
if bb.data.inherits_class('nopackages', d):
continue
typelower = type.lower()
d.appendVar('PACKAGES', ' %s-image-%s' % (kname, typelower))
d.setVar('FILES:' + kname + '-image-' + typelower, '/' + imagedest +
'/' + type + '-${KERNEL_VERSION_NAME}' + ' /' + imagedest + '/' + type)
- d.appendVar('RDEPENDS:%s-image' % kname, ' %s-image-%s' % (kname,
typelower))
+ d.appendVar('RDEPENDS:%s-image' % kname, ' %s-image-%s (= %s)' %
(kname, typelower, fullver))
splitmods = d.getVar("KERNEL_SPLIT_MODULES")
if splitmods != '1':
- d.appendVar('RDEPENDS:%s-image' % kname, ' %s-modules' % kname)
- d.appendVar('RDEPENDS:%s-image-%s' % (kname, typelower), '
%s-modules-${KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME}' % kname)
+ d.appendVar('RDEPENDS:%s-image' % kname, ' %s-modules (= %s)' %
(kname, fullver))
+ d.appendVar('RDEPENDS:%s-image-%s' % (kname, typelower), '
%s-modules-${KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME} (= %s)' % (kname, fullver))
d.setVar('PKG:%s-modules' % kname,
'%s-modules-${KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME}' % kname)
d.appendVar('RPROVIDES:%s-modules' % kname,
'%s-modules-${KERNEL_VERSION_PKG_NAME}' % kname)
@@ -628,12 +629,12 @@ FILES:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-image = ""
FILES:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-dev = "/boot/System.map* /boot/Module.symvers*
/boot/config* ${KERNEL_SRC_PATH}
${nonarch_base_libdir}/modules/${KERNEL_VERSION}/build"
FILES:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-vmlinux = "/boot/vmlinux-${KERNEL_VERSION_NAME}"
FILES:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-modules = ""
-RDEPENDS:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME} = "${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-base"
+RDEPENDS:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME} = "${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-base (=
${EXTENDPKGV})"
# Allow machines to override this dependency if kernel image files are
# not wanted in images as standard
-RDEPENDS:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-base ?= "${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-image"
+RDEPENDS:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-base ?= "${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-image (=
${EXTENDPKGV})"
PKG:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-image =
"${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-image-${@legitimize_package_name(d.getVar('KERNEL_VERSION'))}"
-RDEPENDS:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-image +=
"${@oe.utils.conditional('KERNEL_IMAGETYPE', 'vmlinux',
'${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-vmlinux', '', d)}"
+RDEPENDS:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-image +=
"${@oe.utils.conditional('KERNEL_IMAGETYPE', 'vmlinux',
'${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-vmlinux (= ${EXTENDPKGV})', '', d)}"
PKG:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-base =
"${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-${@legitimize_package_name(d.getVar('KERNEL_VERSION'))}"
RPROVIDES:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-base +=
"${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME}-${KERNEL_VERSION}"
ALLOW_EMPTY:${KERNEL_PACKAGE_NAME} = "1"
--
2.31.1
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#155164):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/155164
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/85083971/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
