On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 3:48 PM Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 2021-05-13 at 17:33 -0400, colin walters wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021, at 4:08 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > > > > > The advice to anyone hitting this issue is to add in the correct branch > > > to the SRC_URI. It is simple and easy to do, can be in bbappends > > > or even changed via anonymous python and similar if necessary. We've > > > already > > > found the issue with several core recipes, we simply updated them and most > > > users didn't notice. I would even likely take that kind of change into > > > older > > > otherwise unmaintained branches and I think I did so in at least one case > > > in > > > the past. > > > > What I am uncertain about is: how quickly does that translate into us being > > able to remove the old branch? > > My personal opinion is see the patches updating the SRC_URIs make the branches > given we know about this one and then do it. > > > We're not the first project to do this and we won't be the last, so having a > > solution here will be good. > > I'm suggesting people update the recipes. > > > Hmm actually I notice systemd upstream did the rename a while ago and > > they're > > not carrying a `master` branch. What's the difference between systemd and > > ostree here? > > > > Is it the use of `SRCREV`? Or no, in the systemd case is it because it's > > set to a tag? > > https://github.com/openembedded/openembedded-core/blob/2621dbbc1181808f18ca4ae79408d0d5b557670f/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd.inc#L18 > > ostree is also using tags, is the recipe just broken in not using tags? > > No: > > SRCBRANCH = "v247-stable" > SRC_URI = > "git://github.com/systemd/systemd-stable.git;protocol=git;branch=${SRCBRANCH} > > i.e. there is a specific branch specified. > > > > I appreciate the tooling could do all kinds of magic things. I have a > > > strong > > > preference for not adding magic into it, or over complicating it, it is > > > already > > > horrendously complicated and a nightmare to test. I appreciate nobody > > > believes > > > me, I only do my best to maintain it. The code is here for anyone > > > interested: > > > > > > http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/tree/bitbake/lib/bb/fetch2/git.py > > > > Yeah, understood. > > > > > I'd also note you can add ;nobranch=1 to the urls or ;usehead=1. Those do > > > have side effects, I will not recommend them, or accept them for general > > > use > > > in layers I maintain, they're considered developer options. I was reminded > > > recently that we have seen bugs the branch parameter has caught where a > > > revision was not where we thought it was so these do catch real world > > > issues. > > > > Well I hope the result of this discussion is a recommended best practice at > > least. > > If recommending using a tag works, that seems good to me. > > People should add/update the branch in SRC_URI.
Could we perhaps have an "official" recommendation on that somewhere which users etc could be pointed to? I've just had a discussion along the lines of "but ;nobranch=1 works and will be more robust than setting ;branch=main if upstream changes their mind again". From a user's point of view it's not clear at all that setting branch is the better solution or why.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#152050): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/152050 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/82782995/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
