opkg svn: respect to the arch priority
cover opkg svn: respect to the arch priority
After the discussion, this seems a proper solution:
Let the arch priority win the higher version by default, and add an option (--select-higher-version) for it to make the higher version win the arch priority, so that the user can have another choice.
This is only for opkg_svn.bb, maybe the opkg_0.1.8.bb should be removed since it does work on the master branch:
- It doesn't support the "--force_postinstall" option which is used by package_ipk.bbclass.
- It still doesn't work after remove the "--force_postinstall" option, it can't install the packages in complementary_pkgs.txt, I haven't found out the reason.
I'd like to remove it.
* Test info
- With MACHINE= "qemux86"
$ bitbake core-image-sato - With MACHINE= "crownbay" $ bitbake core-image-sato
The "xserver-xorg*_1.9.3-r1_core2.ipk" will be installed to the crownbay's image. It would install the "xserver-xorg*_1.11.2-r7_i586.ipk" in the past.
- Simulate the upgrade command:
Quoted 1 line
Update the list:
$ ./tmp/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/opkg-cl -f \ /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/opkg.conf \ -o /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/rootfs update
Quoted 1 line
Test the upgrade command:
$ ./tmp/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/opkg-cl -f /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/opkg.conf \ -o /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/rootfs upgrade # Nothing has been done
Quoted 1 line
Test the --select-higher-version
$ ./tmp/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/opkg-cl -f /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/opkg.conf -o /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/rootfs \ --select-higher-version upgrade # The "xserver-xorg*_1.9.3-r1_core2.ipk" would be upgraded to "xserver-xorg*_1.11.2-r7_i586.ipk".
$ runqemu qemux86 The image started, and run the "opkg-cl" command in qemu, it worked well.
// Robert
The following changes since commit 913944d904266bf90af0cad94b4f0fb3652bd29d:
upstream_tracking: update lsb and ltp (2012-09-14 17:12:52 +0100)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib robert/ipk_arch
http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=robert/ipk_arch
Robert Yang (1):
opkg svn: respect to the arch priority
.../opkg/opkg/select_higher_version.patch | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++ meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb | 3 +- 2 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) create mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/select_higher_version.patch
PATCH 1/1 opkg svn: respect to the arch priority
This is for fixing the problem:
1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk with MACHINE=qemux86
2) bitbake core-image-sato with with MACHINE=crownbay
The qemux86's PACKAGE_ARCH is i586, the crownbay's is core2, but several i586 packages will be installed into crownbay's rootfs though there are core2 packages. For example, there are:
xserver-xorg*_1.11.2-r7_i586.ipk
xserver-xorg*_1.9.3-r1_core2.ipk
The crownbay.conf says:
PREFERRED_VERSION_xserver-xorg ?= "1.9.3"
What the crownbay's image needs is xserver-xorg*_1.9.3-r1_core2.ipk, but the xserver-xorg*_1.11.2-r7_i586.ipk will be installed, this is incorrect.
This is caused by opkg's selecting mechanism: when more than one candidate is found, it will use the higher version one and ignore the arch priority.
we have several conf files which set the PREFERRED_VERSION_pkg = "..." , but there is no such a mechanism which can let us tell the opkg to install the preferred version. When the preferred version is higher, this is OK, but if the preferred version is lower, there would be problems:
1) Most of the packages are core2 in the image, but several of them are i586, though we have built the core2 ones, this seems strange.
2) What's worse is that the image may not work since the preferred version pkg is not installed.
We have set the arch priority clearly in the opkg.conf, I think that respect to the arch priority is reasonable during the image generation.
Add the "--select-higher-version" option to let the user have another choice, the default is no.
[YOCTO #2575]
--- .../opkg/opkg/select_higher_version.patch | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++ meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb | 3 +- 2 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) create mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/select_higher_version.patch
meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/select_higher_version.patch new file +102 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@ +Add the --select-higher-version option + +If there were more than one candidate which had the same pkg name in the +candidate list, for example, the same pkg with different versions, then +it would use the last one which was the highest version one in the past, +but it will use the higher arch priority one now. + +Add the "--select-higher-version" option to let it use the higher +version package when enabled. the default is no. + +Upstream-Status: Pending + +Signed-off-by: Robert Yang <[email protected]> +--- + libopkg/opkg_conf.h | 1 + + libopkg/pkg_hash.c | 18 +++++++++++++++--- + src/opkg-cl.c | 9 +++++++++ + 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) + +diff --git a/libopkg/opkg_conf.h b/libopkg/opkg_conf.h +--- a/libopkg/opkg_conf.h ++++ b/libopkg/opkg_conf.h +@@ -77,6 +77,7 @@ struct opkg_conf + int force_removal_of_essential_packages; + int force_postinstall; + int force_remove; ++ int select_higher_version; + int check_signature; + int nodeps; /* do not follow dependencies */ + char *offline_root; +diff --git a/libopkg/pkg_hash.c b/libopkg/pkg_hash.c +--- a/libopkg/pkg_hash.c ++++ b/libopkg/pkg_hash.c +@@ -376,10 +376,22 @@ pkg_hash_fetch_best_installation_candidate(abstract_pkg_t *apkg, + if (constraint_fcn(matching, cdata)) { + opkg_msg(DEBUG, "Candidate: %s %s.\n", + matching->name, matching->version) ; +- good_pkg_by_name = matching; + /* It has been provided by hand, so it is what user want */ +- if (matching->provided_by_hand == 1) +- break; ++ if (matching->provided_by_hand == 1) { ++ good_pkg_by_name = matching; ++ break; ++ } ++ /* Respect to the arch priorities when given alternatives */ ++ if (good_pkg_by_name && !conf->select_higher_version) { ++ if (matching->arch_priority >= good_pkg_by_name->arch_priority) { ++ good_pkg_by_name = matching; ++ opkg_msg(DEBUG, "%s %s wins by priority.\n", ++ matching->name, matching->version) ; ++ } else ++ opkg_msg(DEBUG, "%s %s wins by priority.\n", ++ good_pkg_by_name->name, good_pkg_by_name->version) ; ++ } else ++ good_pkg_by_name = matching; + } + } + +diff --git a/src/opkg-cl.c b/src/opkg-cl.c +--- a/src/opkg-cl.c ++++ b/src/opkg-cl.c +@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ enum { + ARGS_OPT_FORCE_SPACE, + ARGS_OPT_FORCE_POSTINSTALL, + ARGS_OPT_FORCE_REMOVE, ++ ARGS_OPT_SELECT_HIGHER_VERSION, + ARGS_OPT_ADD_ARCH, + ARGS_OPT_ADD_DEST, + ARGS_OPT_NOACTION, +@@ -83,6 +84,8 @@ static struct option long_options[] = { + {"force_postinstall", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_FORCE_POSTINSTALL}, + {"force-remove", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_FORCE_REMOVE}, + {"force_remove", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_FORCE_REMOVE}, ++ {"select-higher-version", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_SELECT_HIGHER_VERSION}, ++ {"select_higher_version", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_SELECT_HIGHER_VERSION}, + {"noaction", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_NOACTION}, + {"download-only", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_DOWNLOAD_ONLY}, + {"nodeps", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_NODEPS}, +@@ -173,6 +176,9 @@ args_parse(int argc, char *argv[]) + case ARGS_OPT_FORCE_REMOVE: + conf->force_remove = 1; + break; ++ case ARGS_OPT_SELECT_HIGHER_VERSION: ++ conf->select_higher_version = 1; ++ break; + case ARGS_OPT_NODEPS: + conf->nodeps = 1; + break; +@@ -271,6 +277,9 @@ usage() + printf("\t--offline-root <dir> offline installation of packages.\n"); + printf("\t--add-arch <arch>:<prio> Register architecture with given priority\n"); + printf("\t--add-dest <name>:<path> Register destination with given path\n"); ++ printf("\t--select-higher-version\t Use the higher version package rather\n"); ++ printf("\t than the higher arch priority one if more\n"); ++ printf("\t than one candidate is found.\n"); + + printf("\nForce Options:\n"); + printf("\t--force-depends Install/remove despite failed dependencies\n"); +-- +1.7.1 +
meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb +2 -1
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ SRC_URI = "svn://opkg.googlecode.com/svn;module=trunk;protocol=http \ file://offline_postinstall.patch\ file://track_parents.patch \ file://conf_override.patch \ + file://select_higher_version.patch \ " S = "${WORKDIR}/trunk"
@@ -14,4 +15,4 @@ S = "${WORKDIR}/trunk" SRCREV = "633" PV = "0.1.8+svnr${SRCPV}" -PR = "${INC_PR}.2" +PR = "${INC_PR}.3"
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
Quoted 31 lines · Robert Yang
This is for fixing the problem:
1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk with MACHINE=qemux86
2) bitbake core-image-sato with with MACHINE=crownbayThe qemux86's
PACKAGE_ARCHis i586, the crownbay's is core2, but several i586 packages will be installed into crownbay's rootfs though there are core2 packages. For example, there are:xserver-xorg*_1.11.2-r7_i586.ipk
xserver-xorg*_1.9.3-r1_core2.ipkThe crownbay.conf says:
PREFERRED_VERSION_xserver-xorg ?= "1.9.3"What the crownbay's image needs is xserver-xorg*_1.9.3-r1_core2.ipk, but the xserver-xorg*_1.11.2-r7_i586.ipk will be installed, this is incorrect.
This is caused by opkg's selecting mechanism: when more than one candidate is found, it will use the higher version one and ignore the arch priority.
we have several conf files which set the
PREFERRED_VERSION_pkg= "..." , but there is no such a mechanism which can let us tell the opkg to install the preferred version. When the preferred version is higher, this is OK, but if the preferred version is lower, there would be problems:1) Most of the packages are core2 in the image, but several of them are i586, though we have built the core2 ones, this seems strange.
Quoted 8 lines
2) What's worse is that the image may not work since the preferred version pkg is not installed.
We have set the arch priority clearly in the opkg.conf, I think that respect to the arch priority is reasonable during the image generation.
Add the "--select-higher-version" option to let the user have another choice, the default is no.
Can you send this upstream to see what they think about this issue?
Thanks
Cheers,
Quoted 144 lines
[YOCTO #2575]
Signed-off-by Robert Yang <[email protected]>--- .../opkg/opkg/select_higher_version.patch | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++ meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb | 3 +- 2 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) create mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/select_higher_version.patchmeta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/select_higher_version.patch new file +102
-0@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@ +Add the --select-higher-version option + +If there were more than one candidate which had the same pkg name in the +candidate list, for example, the same pkg with different versions, then +it would use the last one which was the highest version one in the past, +but it will use the higher arch priority one now. + +Add the "--select-higher-version" option to let it use the higher +version package when enabled. the default is no. + +Upstream-Status: Pending + +Signed-off-by: Robert Yang <[email protected]> +--- + libopkg/opkg_conf.h | 1 + + libopkg/pkg_hash.c | 18 +++++++++++++++--- + src/opkg-cl.c | 9 +++++++++ + 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) + +diff --git a/libopkg/opkg_conf.h b/libopkg/opkg_conf.h +--- a/libopkg/opkg_conf.h ++++ b/libopkg/opkg_conf.h +@@ -77,6 +77,7 @@ struct opkg_conf + int force_removal_of_essential_packages; + int force_postinstall; + int force_remove; ++ int select_higher_version; + int check_signature; + int nodeps; /* do not follow dependencies */ + char *offline_root; +diff --git a/libopkg/pkg_hash.c b/libopkg/pkg_hash.c +--- a/libopkg/pkg_hash.c ++++ b/libopkg/pkg_hash.c +@@ -376,10 +376,22 @@ pkg_hash_fetch_best_installation_candidate(abstract_pkg_t *apkg, + if (constraint_fcn(matching, cdata)) { + opkg_msg(DEBUG, "Candidate: %s %s.\n", + matching->name, matching->version) ; +- good_pkg_by_name = matching; + /* It has been provided by hand, so it is what user want */ +- if (matching->provided_by_hand == 1) +- break; ++ if (matching->provided_by_hand == 1) { ++ good_pkg_by_name = matching; ++ break; ++ } ++ /* Respect to the arch priorities when given alternatives */ ++ if (good_pkg_by_name && !conf->select_higher_version) { ++ if (matching->arch_priority >= good_pkg_by_name->arch_priority) { ++ good_pkg_by_name = matching; ++ opkg_msg(DEBUG, "%s %s wins by priority.\n", ++ matching->name, matching->version) ; ++ } else ++ opkg_msg(DEBUG, "%s %s wins by priority.\n", ++ good_pkg_by_name->name, good_pkg_by_name->version) ; ++ } else ++ good_pkg_by_name = matching; + } + } + +diff --git a/src/opkg-cl.c b/src/opkg-cl.c +--- a/src/opkg-cl.c ++++ b/src/opkg-cl.c +@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ enum { + ARGS_OPT_FORCE_SPACE, + ARGS_OPT_FORCE_POSTINSTALL, + ARGS_OPT_FORCE_REMOVE, ++ ARGS_OPT_SELECT_HIGHER_VERSION, + ARGS_OPT_ADD_ARCH, + ARGS_OPT_ADD_DEST, + ARGS_OPT_NOACTION, +@@ -83,6 +84,8 @@ static struct option long_options[] = { + {"force_postinstall", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_FORCE_POSTINSTALL}, + {"force-remove", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_FORCE_REMOVE}, + {"force_remove", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_FORCE_REMOVE}, ++ {"select-higher-version", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_SELECT_HIGHER_VERSION}, ++ {"select_higher_version", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_SELECT_HIGHER_VERSION}, + {"noaction", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_NOACTION}, + {"download-only", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_DOWNLOAD_ONLY}, + {"nodeps", 0, 0, ARGS_OPT_NODEPS}, +@@ -173,6 +176,9 @@ args_parse(int argc, char *argv[]) + case ARGS_OPT_FORCE_REMOVE: + conf->force_remove = 1; + break; ++ case ARGS_OPT_SELECT_HIGHER_VERSION: ++ conf->select_higher_version = 1; ++ break; + case ARGS_OPT_NODEPS: + conf->nodeps = 1; + break; +@@ -271,6 +277,9 @@ usage() + printf("\t--offline-root <dir> offline installation of packages.\n"); + printf("\t--add-arch <arch>:<prio> Register architecture with given priority\n"); + printf("\t--add-dest <name>:<path> Register destination with given path\n"); ++ printf("\t--select-higher-version\t Use the higher version package rather\n"); ++ printf("\t than the higher arch priority one if more\n"); ++ printf("\t than one candidate is found.\n"); + + printf("\nForce Options:\n"); + printf("\t--force-depends Install/remove despite failed dependencies\n"); +-- +1.7.1 +meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb +2
-1@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ SRC_URI = "svn://opkg.googlecode.com/svn;module=trunk;protocol=http \ file://offline_postinstall.patch\ file://track_parents.patch \ file://conf_override.patch \ + file://select_higher_version.patch \ " S = "${WORKDIR}/trunk"@@ -14,4 +15,4 @@ S = "${WORKDIR}/trunk" SRCREV = "633" PV = "0.1.8+svnr${SRCPV}" -PR = "${INC_PR}.2" +PR = "${INC_PR}.3"Signature · 7 lines
1.7.1 _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Signature · 1 line
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected]
Op 18 sep. 2012, om 17:25 heeft Robert Yang <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 11 lines
This is for fixing the problem:
1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk with MACHINE=qemux86
2) bitbake core-image-sato with with MACHINE=crownbayThe qemux86's
PACKAGE_ARCHis i586, the crownbay's is core2, but several i586 packages will be installed into crownbay's rootfs though there are core2 packages. For example, there are:xserver-xorg*_1.11.2-r7_i586.ipk
xserver-xorg*_1.9.3-r1_core2.ipk
Quoted 6 lines
The crownbay.conf says:
PREFERRED_VERSION_xserver-xorg ?= "1.9.3"What the crownbay's image needs is xserver-xorg*_1.9.3-r1_core2.ipk, but the xserver-xorg*_1.11.2-r7_i586.ipk will be installed, this is incorrect.
So what happens when I force crownbay to use i586 as package arch? Are you still going to argue that 1.9.3 should be installed?
Quoted 14 lines
This is caused by opkg's selecting mechanism: when more than one candidate is found, it will use the higher version one and ignore the arch priority.
we have several conf files which set the
PREFERRED_VERSION_pkg= "..." , but there is no such a mechanism which can let us tell the opkg to install the preferred version. When the preferred version is higher, this is OK, but if the preferred version is lower, there would be problems:1) Most of the packages are core2 in the image, but several of them are i586, though we have built the core2 ones, this seems strange.
Quoted 8 lines
2) What's worse is that the image may not work since the preferred version pkg is not installed.
We have set the arch priority clearly in the opkg.conf, I think that respect to the arch priority is reasonable during the image generation.
Add the "--select-higher-version" option to let the user have another choice, the default is no.
The default should be yes, since that is the default behaviour right now. You can set it to 'no' in rootfs_ipk.bbclass, though.
Saul Wold
AppliedQuoted 61 lines · Robert Yang
After the discussion, this seems a proper solution:
Let the arch priority win the higher version by default, and add an option (--select-higher-version) for it to make the higher version win the arch priority, so that the user can have another choice.
This is only for opkg_svn.bb, maybe the opkg_0.1.8.bb should be removed since it does work on the master branch:
- It doesn't support the "--force_postinstall" option which is used by package_ipk.bbclass.- It still doesn't work after remove the "--force_postinstall" option, it can't install the packages in complementary_pkgs.txt, I haven't found out the reason.
I'd like to remove it.
* Test info
- With MACHINE= "qemux86"$ bitbake core-image-sato - With MACHINE= "crownbay" $ bitbake core-image-satoThe "xserver-xorg*_1.9.3-r1_core2.ipk" will be installed to the crownbay's image. It would install the "xserver-xorg*_1.11.2-r7_i586.ipk" in the past.
- Simulate the upgrade command:
Quoted 1 line
Update the list:
$ ./tmp/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/opkg-cl -f \ /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/opkg.conf \ -o /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/rootfs updateQuoted 1 line
Test the upgrade command:
$ ./tmp/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/opkg-cl -f /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/opkg.conf \ -o /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/rootfs upgrade # Nothing has been doneQuoted 1 line
Test the --select-higher-version
$ ./tmp/sysroots/i686-linux/usr/bin/opkg-cl -f /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/opkg.conf -o /buildarea2/lyang1/ipk_build/tmp/work/crownbay-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/rootfs \ --select-higher-version upgrade # The "xserver-xorg*_1.9.3-r1_core2.ipk" would be upgraded to "xserver-xorg*_1.11.2-r7_i586.ipk".$ runqemu qemux86 The image started, and run the "opkg-cl" command in qemu, it worked well.// Robert
The following changes since commit
913944d904266bf90af0cad94b4f0fb3652bd29d:upstream_tracking: update lsb and ltp (2012-09-14 17:12:52 +0100)are available in the git repository at:
git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contribrobert/ipk_arch
http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=robert/ipk_arch
Quoted 8 lines
Robert Yang (1):
opkg svn: respect to the arch priority.../opkg/opkg/select_higher_version.patch | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++ meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb | 3 +- 2 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)create mode 100644
meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/select_higher_version.patch
Merged into OE-Core
Thanks
Sau!
Quoted 6 lines
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core