Yocto Project Status WW09
Current Dev Position: YP 2.1 M3
Next Deadline: YP 2.1 M3 Cutoff (Feature Freeze) February 29, 2016
SWAT team rotation: Tracy -> Alejandero
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Build_Failure_Swat_Team
Key Status/Updates:
* 2.1 Feature Freeze is upon us. If there is any feature you want to see in 2.1 which isn't going to make the deadline, talk to RP.
* We plan to release 2.1 M2 despite the sato glib issue, granting an exception for the high bug and then concentrate on 2.1 M3.
* 2.1 M3 build won't happen until sato glib issue resolved.
* Also planning to merge the gobject-introspection changes
* Pseudo connection issue appears to be addressed with increased retry numbers. Tests ongoing.
* We're about to try and transition meta-yocto within meta-yocto to meta-poky. The amount of pain this is causing is horrible :(.
* We're considering a bump in the minimum git version requirements due to the requirements of various pieces of project tooling.
* We're rebuilding jethro 2.0.1 due to the glibc security issue, now at -rc7.
Key YP 2.1 Dates:
YP 2.1 M2 Target release date is February 12, 2016 (Will slip a few weeks.)
YP 2.1 M3 Cutoff (Feature Freeze) date is February 29, 2016 noon GMT YP 2.1 M3 Target release date is March 18, 2016
YP 2.1 M4 / Final Cutoff: March 28, 2016 noon GMT - Stabilization only milestone.
YP 2.1 Final Release Target: April 29, 2016
Key Status Links for YP:
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Project_v2.1_Status
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_2.1_Schedule
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_2.1_Features
Tracking Metrics:
WDD 2565 (last week 2585)
(https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/charts/combo.html)
[If anyone has suggestions for other information you’d like to see on this weekly status update, let us know!]
Thanks,
Richard--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Quoted 6 lines · Richard Purdie
Current Dev Position: YP 2.1 M3
Next Deadline: YP 2.1 M3 Cutoff (Feature Freeze) February 29, 2016SWAT team rotation: Tracy -> Alejandero
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Build_Failure_Swat_Team
Quoted 11 lines
Key Status/Updates:
* 2.1 Feature Freeze is upon us. If there is any feature you want to see in 2.1 which isn't going to make the deadline, talk to RP.
* We plan to release 2.1 M2 despite the sato glib issue, granting an exception for the high bug and then concentrate on 2.1 M3.
* 2.1 M3 build won't happen until sato glib issue resolved.
* Also planning to merge the gobject-introspection changes
* Pseudo connection issue appears to be addressed with increased retry numbers. Tests ongoing.
* We're about to try and transition meta-yocto within meta-yocto to meta-poky. The amount of pain this is causing is horrible :(.
Thanks for doing this. Can you summarize the pain? Are there any important lessons here?
Philip
Quoted 34 lines
* We're considering a bump in the minimum git version requirements due to the requirements of various pieces of project tooling.
* We're rebuilding jethro 2.0.1 due to the glibc security issue, now at -rc7.Key YP 2.1 Dates:
YP 2.1 M2 Target release date is February 12, 2016 (Will slip a few weeks.)
YP 2.1 M3 Cutoff (Feature Freeze) date is February 29, 2016 noon GMT YP 2.1 M3 Target release date is March 18, 2016
YP 2.1 M4 / Final Cutoff: March 28, 2016 noon GMT - Stabilization only milestone.
YP 2.1 Final Release Target: April 29, 2016Key Status Links for YP:
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Project_v2.1_Status
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_2.1_Schedule
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_2.1_FeaturesTracking Metrics:
WDD 2565 (last week 2585)(https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/charts/combo.html)
[If anyone has suggestions for other information you’d like to see on this weekly status update, let us know!]
Thanks,
Richard
Quoted 22 lines · Philip Balister
Quoted 6 lines · Richard Purdie
Current Dev Position: YP 2.1 M3
Next Deadline: YP 2.1 M3 Cutoff (Feature Freeze) February 29, 2016SWAT team rotation: Tracy -> Alejandero
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Build_Failure_Swat_TeamQuoted 14 lines
Key Status/Updates:
* 2.1 Feature Freeze is upon us. If there is any feature you want to
see in 2.1 which isn't going to make the deadline, talk to RP.
* We plan to release 2.1 M2 despite the sato glib issue, granting an
exception for the high bug and then concentrate on 2.1 M3.
* 2.1 M3 build won't happen until sato glib issue resolved.
* Also planning to merge the gobject-introspection changes
* Pseudo connection issue appears to be addressed with increased retry
numbers. Tests ongoing.
* We're about to try and transition meta-yocto within meta-yocto to meta-poky. The amount of pain this is causing is horrible :(.
Quoted 2 lines
Thanks for doing this. Can you summarize the pain? Are there any important lessons here?
The key lesson is our current "migration" code in OE-Core sucks and I have some patches in progress which rewrite pieces of it in a way that makes it more useful. I'm therefore trying to make some positives from it.
That said, I haven't found a way to make this work without leaving a dummy layer.conf in the old location since a missing layer.conf file is fatal to bitbake very early on before any migration code triggers.
More should become clear when I post the patches, I've been holding off that until I actually manage a patch set that works on the autobuilder...
Patches should be out over the weekend (in time for the freeze).
Cheers,
Richard
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
* We're about to try and transition meta-yocto within meta-yocto to
meta-poky. The amount of pain this is causing is horrible :(.
Thanks for doing this. Can you summarize the pain? Are there any important lessons here?
The key lesson is our current "migration" code in OE-Core sucks and I have some patches in progress which rewrite pieces of it in a way that makes it more useful. I'm therefore trying to make some positives from it.
That said, I haven't found a way to make this work without leaving a dummy layer.conf in the old location since a missing layer.conf file is fatal to bitbake very early on before any migration code triggers.
Quoted 5 lines
More should become clear when I post the patches, I've been holding off that until I actually manage a patch set that works on the autobuilder...
Patches should be out over the weekend (in time for the freeze).
Sounds like a lot of work and potential for breaking things with little added value other than a more consistent naming. What was the rationale for making the change, if I may ask?
Thanks,
:rjs
Quoted 21 lines · Rudolf J Streif
Quoted 21 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
* We're about to try and transition meta-yocto within meta-yocto to
meta-poky. The amount of pain this is causing is horrible :(.
Thanks for doing this. Can you summarize the pain? Are there any important lessons here?
The key lesson is our current "migration" code in OE-Core sucks and I have some patches in progress which rewrite pieces of it in a way that makes it more useful. I'm therefore trying to make some positives from it.
That said, I haven't found a way to make this work without leaving a dummy layer.conf in the old location since a missing layer.conf file is fatal to bitbake very early on before any migration code triggers.
More should become clear when I post the patches, I've been holding off that until I actually manage a patch set that works on the autobuilder...
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Patches should be out over the weekend (in time for the freeze).
Sounds like a lot of work and potential for breaking things with little added value other than a more consistent naming. What was the rationale for making the change, if I may ask?
Consistent naming :) It does it make it much easier to explain what the meta-yocto layer is for. This has been one source of a great deal of confusion about how all the pieces come together.
I must admit, I'm surprised this is tricky. I look forward to seeing what needs doing. Hopefully, it shows me things I can avoid in my work.
Philip
Quoted 5 lines
Thanks,
:rjs
Quoted 3 lines · Philip Balister
I must admit, I'm surprised this is tricky. I look forward to seeing what needs doing. Hopefully, it shows me things I can avoid in my work.
The moral of the story is don't rename layers if you want to maintain a semblance of migration. Renaming meta-yocto to meta-poky means the bblayers.conf is invalid, so the migration code can't run because bitbake aborts too early.
Ross
This is the sort of case where it'd be nice if bitbake provided a plugin mechanism, pure python, no metadata parsing. Something to think about in the long term..
Quoted 19 lines · Ross
Quoted 3 lines · Philip Balister
I must admit, I'm surprised this is tricky. I look forward to seeing what needs doing. Hopefully, it shows me things I can avoid in my work.
The moral of the story is don't rename layers if you want to maintain a semblance of migration. Renaming meta-yocto to meta-poky means the bblayers.conf is invalid, so the migration code can't run because bitbake aborts too early.
Ross
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
On 26/02/2016 18:36, "[email protected] on behalf of Richard Purdie" <[email protected] on behalf of
Quoted 2 lines · [email protected]> wrote:
* We're about to try and transition meta-yocto within meta-yocto to meta-poky. The amount of pain this is causing is horrible :(.
Just wondering: will this cause us any trouble, apart from the changes needed to the json files?
Cheers
Belén
Signature · 4 lines
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Signature · 4 lines
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core