Alex,
I’d suggest you stop doing those painful big bang migrations and rather
transition to ‘master plus stable backports’ model.
I would love to.. unfortunately, our layer is dependent on multiple vendor
layers which do not use this model. I inherited a lot of technical debt when I
joined and am certainly doing my best to reduce it. I am a bit of a one-man
team on the firmware side of our company and there's only so much
software-best-practices I can pitch to product management that would actually
be seen as beneficial from their perspective. I'm sure you've been in a similar
position before.
Either way, I don't wish for this thread to get too far off-topic. If there is
not a simple way of changing SYSTEMD_SERVICE:${PN} based on a pkg-config module
at build-time, I will just create and maintain a patch to remove the erroneous
target and apply it to the branch we are migrating to. I appreciate the
responses!
Thank you,
Logan
________________________________
From: Alexander Kanavin <alex.kana...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2024 9:40 AM
To: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org <yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org>; Logan Grosz
<logan.gr...@b9c.com>
Cc: Chuck Wolber <chuckwol...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [yocto] Conditionally set SYSTEMD_SERVICE_${PN} based on version
of another package
You don't often get email from alex.kana...@gmail.com. Learn why this is
important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
I’d suggest you stop doing those painful big bang migrations and rather
transition to ‘master plus stable backports’ model.
Alex
On Thu 7. Nov 2024 at 17.31, Logan Grosz via
lists.yoctoproject.org<http://lists.yoctoproject.org>
<Logan.Grosz=b9c....@lists.yoctoproject.org<mailto:b9c....@lists.yoctoproject.org>>
wrote:
Alex and Chuck,
Thank you for your timely responses.
Nobody ever promised you can use the same layer with more than one yocto
release. Please make a branch.
I am aware, but I am also aware of
LAYERSERIES_COMPAT<https://docs.yoctoproject.org/bitbake/2.10/bitbake-user-manual/bitbake-user-manual-ref-variables.html#term-LAYERSERIES_COMPAT>.
I am hoping to utilize it for a brief period to keep our git tree functional
on every commit.
Is there something unique and special about your particular factory reset
target? If not, I suspect
what you are experiencing is a sign that it is time to get rid of that recipe.
No, there is nothing special about the target. The plan is to remove the target
when we are completely migrated over.
If you are using that same layer to build images for multiple Yocto release
versions, this problem is
only going to get worse. Recipe compatibility is not guaranteed between
discrete Yocto releases.
The expectation is that you will branch and update your recipes to keep pace
with each release you
want to support.
There are a lot of changes we are making, so I was trying to keep the changeset
to a minimum. In an effort to keep a nice bitsect-able Git history, I'm trying
to keep the layer buildable on both Yocto releases. However, I plan on removing
any extra handling for the old version once we have a nice workable build on
this newer version.
I only bring this up because it's not uncommon for software to check a version
of its dependency to support multiple versions of it at build-time. I figured
this was a very similar concept.
If there's no neat way of doing this solely in the recipe, then I'll apply the
patch early and note it breaks the factory-reset feature until SystemD 250.
Thank you,
Logan
________________________________
From: Chuck Wolber <chuckwol...@gmail.com<mailto:chuckwol...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2024 9:02 AM
To: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org<mailto:yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org>
<yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org<mailto:yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org>>; Logan
Grosz <logan.gr...@b9c.com<mailto:logan.gr...@b9c.com>>
Subject: Re: [yocto] Conditionally set SYSTEMD_SERVICE_${PN} based on version
of another package
On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 7:34 AM Logan Grosz via
lists.yoctoproject.org<http://lists.yoctoproject.org>
<Logan.Grosz=b9c....@lists.yoctoproject.org<mailto:b9c....@lists.yoctoproject.org>>
wrote:
Hi, all
My company is trying to migrate a newer version of Yocto and in an effort to do
that I am making changes to our current layer to facilitate an easier
transition. One problem I encountered was SystemD 250 installs a target
factory-reset.target, but we already have a recipe that installs a that same
file. The recipe is as follows
Is there something unique and special about your particular factory reset
target? If not, I suspect
what you are experiencing is a sign that it is time to get rid of that recipe.
If you are using that same layer to build images for multiple Yocto release
versions, this problem is
only going to get worse. Recipe compatibility is not guaranteed between
discrete Yocto releases.
The expectation is that you will branch and update your recipes to keep pace
with each release you
want to support.
..Ch:W..
"Perfection must be reached by degrees; she requires the slow hand of time." -
Voltaire
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#64237): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/64237
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/109446043/21656
Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
