Force netbase to be MACHINE specific for all MACHINEs

PATCH In review Joshua Lock 4 participants 12 messages Feb 2, 2012 – Feb 6, 2012

lore

Share & tools

lore

Joshua Lock

author

2012-02-02 18:59 UTC #0 lore raw

cover Force netbase to be MACHINE specific for all MACHINEs

Subject says it all and the detail is in the patch commit entry.

Cheers,
Joshua

The following changes since commit a69108ea388fce9034ecc8670f1149fabae55e1b:

atk: add native / disable introspection / merge atk.inc->recipe / change license (2012-02-02 18:37:21 +0000)

are available in the git repository at:
git://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core-contrib josh/fixes
http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded-core-contrib/log/?h=josh/fixes

Joshua Lock (1):
netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

 meta/recipes-core/netbase/netbase_4.47.bb |    4 +---
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Signature · 1 line

1.7.7.6

Joshua Lock

author

2012-02-02 18:59 UTC #1 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.

This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.

Signed-off-by Joshua Lock <[email protected]>

CC Darren Hart <[email protected]>

---
 meta/recipes-core/netbase/netbase_4.47.bb |    4 +---
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

meta/recipes-core/netbase/netbase_4.47.bb +1 -3

index ddfa8ad..5645580 100644
@@ -48,6 +48,4 @@ do_install () {
 
 CONFFILES_${PN} = "${sysconfdir}/hosts ${sysconfdir}/network/interfaces"
 
-PACKAGE_ARCH_qemuarm = "${MACHINE_ARCH}"
-PACKAGE_ARCH_qemux86 = "${MACHINE_ARCH}"
-PACKAGE_ARCH_qemux86-64 = "${MACHINE_ARCH}"
+PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}"

Signature · 1 line

1.7.7.6

Koen Kooi

2012-02-02 19:02 UTC #2 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:

Quoted 6 lines

Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.
This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.

In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(

regards,

Koen

Joshua Lock

author

2012-02-02 19:07 UTC #3 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

Quoted 11 lines · Koen Kooi

Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 6 lines
Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.
This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.
In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(

This patch doesn't fix netbase, I just thought it would be simpler to make this change than ensure all BSP's use appropriate OVERRIDEs in their netbase bbappends - several I've seen don't.

Cheers,
Joshua

Signature · 3 lines

Joshua Lock
        Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
        Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Darren Hart

2012-02-03 17:24 UTC #4 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

Quoted 13 lines · Joshua Lock

Quoted 12 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 7 lines
Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.
This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 3 lines
In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(
This patch doesn't fix netbase, I just thought it would be simpler to
make this change than ensure all BSP's use appropriate OVERRIDEs in their netbase bbappends - several I've seen don't.

Is there a consensus on whether or not this can go in? I need either this or the BSP layer fix for a new BSP. It seems to me that netbase is overridden enough for machine specific things (like the interface file) that Joshua's approach is the better fix.

Signature · 3 lines

Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel

Khem Raj

2012-02-03 21:16 UTC #11 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

In reply to Joshua Lock

Quoted 9 lines · Joshua Lock

Quoted 8 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 5 lines
Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.
In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(
This patch doesn't fix netbase, I just thought it would be simpler to make this change than ensure all BSP's use appropriate OVERRIDEs in their netbase bbappends - several I've seen don't.

hmm MACHINE is automatic override. but I think making it explicit is better for readability

Quoted 12 lines

Cheers,
Joshua

Signature · 8 lines

Joshua Lock
        Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
        Intel Open Source Technology Centre

_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Signature · 1 line

-Khem

Koen Kooi

2012-02-04 16:16 UTC #5 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

In reply to Darren Hart

Op 3 feb. 2012, om 18:15 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:

Quoted 25 lines · Joshua Lock

Quoted 13 lines · Koen Kooi
Quoted 12 lines
Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 7 lines
Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.
This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(
This patch doesn't fix netbase, I just thought it would be simpler to make this change than ensure all BSP's use appropriate OVERRIDEs in their netbase bbappends - several I've seen don't.

Quoted 4 lines

Is there a consensus on whether or not this can go in? I need either this or the BSP layer fix for a new BSP. It seems to me that netbase is overridden enough for machine specific things (like the interface file) that Joshua's approach is the better fix.

It all depends on how much crap in BSPs you want to fix up in OE-core. Where are you going to draw the line?

Joshua Lock

author

2012-02-06 18:41 UTC #6 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

Quoted 28 lines · Koen Kooi

Op 3 feb. 2012, om 18:15 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 25 lines · Joshua Lock
Quoted 21 lines · Koen Kooi
Quoted 9 lines
Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 5 lines
Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.
In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(
This patch doesn't fix netbase, I just thought it would be simpler to make this change than ensure all BSP's use appropriate OVERRIDEs in their netbase bbappends - several I've seen don't.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 4 lines
Is there a consensus on whether or not this can go in? I need either this or the BSP layer fix for a new BSP. It seems to me that netbase is overridden enough for machine specific things (like the interface file) that Joshua's approach is the better fix.
It all depends on how much crap in BSPs you want to fix up in OE-core. Where are you going to draw the line?

I understand you don't like this change but I don't really understand why?

My intention with the patch is to make it easier for folks to produce BSP's which don't introduce bugs into other builds for the same architecture.

Cheers,
Joshua

Signature · 3 lines

Joshua Lock
        Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
        Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Koen Kooi

2012-02-06 19:06 UTC #7 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

Op 6 feb. 2012 om 19:33 heeft Joshua Lock <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:

Quoted 34 lines · Koen Kooi

Quoted 33 lines
Op 3 feb. 2012, om 18:15 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 29 lines · Joshua Lock
Quoted 13 lines · Koen Kooi
Quoted 12 lines
Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 7 lines
Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.
This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(
This patch doesn't fix netbase, I just thought it would be simpler to make this change than ensure all BSP's use appropriate OVERRIDEs in their netbase bbappends - several I've seen don't.
Is there a consensus on whether or not this can go in? I need either this or the BSP layer fix for a new BSP. It seems to me that netbase is overridden enough for machine specific things (like the interface file) that Joshua's approach is the better fix.

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 1 line
It all depends on how much crap in BSPs you want to fix up in OE-core. Where are you going to draw the line?
I understand you don't like this change but I don't really understand why?
My intention with the patch is to make it easier for folks to produce BSP's which don't introduce bugs into other builds for the same architecture.

You're not making it easier, you're just fixing up bugs in the BSP in oe-core. So where do you draw the line on that?

Quoted 12 lines

Cheers,
Joshua

Signature · 8 lines

Joshua Lock
       Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
       Intel Open Source Technology Centre

_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Joshua Lock

author

2012-02-06 19:45 UTC #8 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

Quoted 31 lines · Koen Kooi

Op 6 feb. 2012 om 19:33 heeft Joshua Lock<[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 30 lines · Koen Kooi
Quoted 29 lines
Op 3 feb. 2012, om 18:15 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 27 lines · Joshua Lock
Quoted 13 lines · Koen Kooi
Quoted 12 lines
Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 7 lines
Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.
This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(
This patch doesn't fix netbase, I just thought it would be simpler to make this change than ensure all BSP's use appropriate OVERRIDEs in their netbase bbappends - several I've seen don't.
Is there a consensus on whether or not this can go in? I need either this or the BSP layer fix for a new BSP. It seems to me that netbase is overridden enough for machine specific things (like the interface file) that Joshua's approach is the better fix.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
It all depends on how much crap in BSPs you want to fix up in OE-core. Where are you going to draw the line?
I understand you don't like this change but I don't really understand why?
My intention with the patch is to make it easier for folks to produce BSP's which don't introduce bugs into other builds for the same architecture.
You're not making it easier, you're just fixing up bugs in the BSP in oe-core. So where do you draw

the line on that?

Thanks for persisting.

As I understand your argument: BSP developers still need to understand the intricacies involved as soon as they make a similar change to a non-netbase recipe?

I can't and won't disagree with that.

I could argue that, in the specific case of netbase, it's reasonable to expect the resultant package file to be MACHINE specific. For example, I wouldn't expect to take the network configuration from my laptop, copy it to my workstation and for it to all work.

Either way, I'm not attached to this patch but I do think the discussion has been useful.

Thanks,
Joshua

Signature · 3 lines

Joshua Lock
        Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
        Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Koen Kooi

2012-02-06 19:58 UTC #9 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

Op 6 feb. 2012, om 20:37 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:

Quoted 41 lines · Koen Kooi

Quoted 31 lines
Op 6 feb. 2012 om 19:33 heeft Joshua Lock<[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 30 lines · Koen Kooi
Quoted 29 lines
Op 3 feb. 2012, om 18:15 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 27 lines · Joshua Lock
Quoted 13 lines · Koen Kooi
Quoted 12 lines
Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 7 lines
Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.
This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(
This patch doesn't fix netbase, I just thought it would be simpler to make this change than ensure all BSP's use appropriate OVERRIDEs in their netbase bbappends - several I've seen don't.
Is there a consensus on whether or not this can go in? I need either this or the BSP layer fix for a new BSP. It seems to me that netbase is overridden enough for machine specific things (like the interface file) that Joshua's approach is the better fix.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
It all depends on how much crap in BSPs you want to fix up in OE-core. Where are you going to draw the line?
I understand you don't like this change but I don't really understand why?
My intention with the patch is to make it easier for folks to produce BSP's which don't introduce bugs into other builds for the same architecture.
You're not making it easier, you're just fixing up bugs in the BSP in oe-core. So where do you draw
the line on that?

Quoted 7 lines

Thanks for persisting.
As I understand your argument: BSP developers still need to understand the intricacies involved as soon as they make a similar change to a non-netbase recipe?
I can't and won't disagree with that.
I could argue that, in the specific case of netbase, it's reasonable to expect the resultant package file to be MACHINE specific. For example, I wouldn't expect to take the network configuration from my laptop, copy it to my workstation and for it to all work.

On the subject of networking, there's some overlap between the network management on oe-core/meta-oe. The current options:

* ifupdown (/etc/network/interfaces)
* connman (ignores /etc/network/interfaces)
* network manager (has a plugin to stay away from interfaces listed in /etc/network/interfaces)

I think we should have a look at how those 3 intergrate into the images we build. There is no cabal, but some face time at ELC would likely help :)

regards,

Koen

Joshua Lock

author

2012-02-06 20:03 UTC #10 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

Quoted 51 lines · Koen Kooi

Op 6 feb. 2012, om 20:37 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 41 lines · Koen Kooi
Quoted 31 lines
Op 6 feb. 2012 om 19:33 heeft Joshua Lock<[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 30 lines · Koen Kooi
Quoted 29 lines
Op 3 feb. 2012, om 18:15 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 27 lines · Joshua Lock
Quoted 13 lines · Koen Kooi
Quoted 12 lines
Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 7 lines
Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.
This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files around.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(
This patch doesn't fix netbase, I just thought it would be simpler to make this change than ensure all BSP's use appropriate OVERRIDEs in their netbase bbappends - several I've seen don't.
Is there a consensus on whether or not this can go in? I need either this or the BSP layer fix for a new BSP. It seems to me that netbase is overridden enough for machine specific things (like the interface file) that Joshua's approach is the better fix.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
It all depends on how much crap in BSPs you want to fix up in OE-core. Where are you going to draw the line?
I understand you don't like this change but I don't really understand why?
My intention with the patch is to make it easier for folks to produce BSP's which don't introduce bugs into other builds for the same architecture.
You're not making it easier, you're just fixing up bugs in the BSP in oe-core. So where do you draw
the line on that?
Quoted 7 lines
Thanks for persisting.
As I understand your argument: BSP developers still need to understand the intricacies involved as soon as they make a similar change to a non-netbase recipe?
I can't and won't disagree with that.
I could argue that, in the specific case of netbase, it's reasonable to expect the resultant package file to be MACHINE specific. For example, I wouldn't expect to take the network configuration from my laptop, copy it to my workstation and for it to all work.

Quoted 7 lines

On the subject of networking, there's some overlap between the network management on oe-core/meta-oe. The current options:
* ifupdown (/etc/network/interfaces)
* connman (ignores /etc/network/interfaces)
* network manager (has a plugin to stay away from interfaces listed in /etc/network/interfaces)
I think we should have a look at how those 3 intergrate into the images we build. There is no cabal, but some face time at ELC would likely help :)

Agreed. I'm keen to have the layers interoperate more nicely so would welcome the discussion of this at ELC.

I'll be sure to share with the list too!

Cheers,
Joshua

Signature · 3 lines

Joshua Lock
        Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
        Intel Open Source Technology Centre