On 10/25/22 4:30 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 09:22:35AM -0500, Andrew Davis via
lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
This bbappend is not functional on the latest net-snmp. The additional
patches are ~61k lines, half the entire size of meta-arago. This extra
functionality should have been added to a forked repo and that is how we
should add this back if ever needed again. Remove this recipe.
I'm fine with removing these patches, since they break the latest snmp and
it's been disabled in default images since Kirkstone.
But I'm not so sure about promoting forked repo concept...
The best approach, of course, is to get the patches submitted, reviewed and
accepted upstream (snmp in this case).
Making changes with patches, instead of a forked repo, has this benefit - when
updating layer to a new release/LTS and these patches start breaking, it gets
noticed right away. It forces a decision - either someone is tasked with
updating the patches and fixing the breakage, or they get removed/disabled at
least.
That's fair. I'd say we also start to reduce our wildcard bbappends, if the
package moves forward underneath, then we should re-evaluate anyway.
Using a forked repo has a high possibility of a stale and outdated component,
collecting security vulnerabilities, unfixed bugs, etc.
I'd normally agree, but at some point the amount of change justifies the fork.
This would certainly be such a case.
Andrew
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#14092):
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-arago/message/14092
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94559249/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-arago/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
