On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Mark Hatle <mark.ha...@windriver.com> wrote: > Checksums and timestamps are not enough to determine a logical progression of > the components. > > We need something that informs the user where these changes fit in the grand > scheme of things. Are they newer or older then a recipe of the same name (and > package version)?
I think we might want to stop using the term PR to describe what you're talking about here. PR has historically had a quite specific meaning to us, given how bitbake has operated, and how stamps worked. It sounds like you want to formalize what we've likely all been doing manually -- PR .= ".1" or whatever in the .bbappend of a given layer. Do you think we really need a format string for this, or would introducing a new variable that's simply a list of extra version components, and which is used by the packaging classes, likely not by bitbake itself, get the job done? Am I grasping your need correctly? -- Christopher Larson clarson at kergoth dot com Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus Maintainer - Tslib Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
