> -----Original Message----- > From: openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org > [mailto:openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of > Peter Kjellerstedt > Sent: den 16 maj 2017 18:30 > To: Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> > Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] Allow oe-pkgdata-util package-info > to display more info > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richard Purdie [mailto:richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org] > > Sent: den 16 maj 2017 15:15 > > To: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerst...@axis.com>; openembedded- > > c...@lists.openembedded.org > > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] Allow oe-pkgdata-util package-info > > to display more info > > > > On Tue, 2017-05-16 at 12:56 +0200, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote: > > > After a build in our autobuilder, we use `oe-pkgdata-util package- > > > info -f package.manifest` to store a file with information about > > > each installed package. This is typically used to compare builds > > > later on. Since not every difference to a package is explained by > > > its version, we have found it beneficial to also include the > > > SRC_URI in the generated file. > > > > > > This patch set adds SRC_URI to the pkgdata that is stored for each > > > package, and adds a new option to oe-pkgdata-util package-info, > > > -e <var>, that can be used to display extra variables from the > > > pkgdata. > > > > I'm going to say no to this. > > > > The reason is that pkgdata is not really about collecting up all > > build information. If you want to know how two different builds > > differ, you'd use the sigdata files. If I take this patch, more > > will follow where you find some new difference you want to track > > and there are other mechanisms I'd suggest (buildhistory and > > siginfo for starters). I don't want to turn the pkgdata files > > into something they're not. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Richard > > As you may have expected, that was not the response I had hoped for. > However, I will see if we can come to a working solution that you can > accept. > > Since I hope that the change to oe-pkgdata-util is acceptable to you, > I will focus on the change in package.bbclass. > > Regarding siginfo: I assume it has the information in there somewhere. > However, I have been working with OE for five years now, and it is > still basically a black hole to me. I have no idea how to do anything > useful with it. > > Regarding buildhistory: AFAICT there is nothing in there about neither > recipe names nor SRC_URI. I guess that can be added, though, if really > needed. > > On the other hand, we have a tool, oe-pkgdata-util, that provides a > simple interface to access the package information, and can produce a > simple information file (oe-pkgdata-util package-info) with one line > per package. This file is simple enough that I can give it to our > maintenance team and they can look at it to see if there are any > differences they need to know about. An additional benefit here is that > we can run oe-pkgdata-util from within a bitbake task to generate the > file together with the other artefacts we produce for a release. > > That said, I can understand that you do not want to add information to > the pkgdata that is not really needed to build. However, would you > accept a way to add to this data, e.g., by specifying a BitBake variable > such as EXTRA_PKGDATA_VARS with the names of the extra variables that > should be stored in pkgdata? That way it would not affect anyone unless > they actually need this extra data, and I would not have the burden of > carrying a backported version of package.bbclass forever in our layers > with all the extra maintenance that incurs. > > //Peter
It has been a week now. Any response would be appreciated. //Peter -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core