Re: [Ltib] Qtopia versioning problem

[Stuart Hughes]

Hi Svein,

Svein Seldal wrote:
> Stuart Hughes wrote:
> > Hi Svein,
> >
> > There was a bug in the way qtopia was packaged.  I have committed the 
> > attached patch to Savannah CVS, please give it a try and let me know 
> > if any problems.
>
> Thanks a lot. I'll test it tomorrow.
>
> An idea for consideration: What if the config/userspace/pkg_map could 
> contain versioning dependencies? Something like:
>
> PKG_QTOPIA = qtopia <= 2.0
> PKG_QTOPIA_4 = qtopia >= 4.0

That would not be possible without redesign.

> Because IMHO, the package coming from qtopia 2 and qtopia 4 should in 
> principle be named "qtopia". They are just two different versions of the 
> same software. This way both spec files for both version 2 and for 
> version 4 can coexist, and ltib would be able to pick out the right one 
> from the version field in the spec-files.

I agree, there should only be PKG_QTOPIA = qtopia as the base/default. 
I left the current fudge as there's logic in packages.lkc associated 
with PKG_QTOPIA_4

> How is this solved on other packages that exists in multiple versions? 
> (like openssl, openswan, busybox, etc.)

The aim in LTIB is that every BSP uses the same set of userspace 
packages, so normally the entry in config/userspace/pkg_map tells you 
which spec file name is associated with a .lkc config symbol. 
Exceptions (which are discouraged) are set by a platform having a local 
pkg_map file in config/platform/_target_/.  This maps the spec file name 
they want to use for that symbol.

> > You should now be able to say: ./ltib -p qtopia-4 for qtopia-4
> > or ./ltib -p qtopia for qtopia 2
> >
> > I don't really like the way this has been packaged as it implies that 
> > you could have both on a system, whereas you can't really as it 
> > doesn't make sense and also the config selection is in a choice-list.  
> > However for now I've left it in this way as the packages have quite a 
> > lot of logic in packages.lkc based on PKG_QTOPIA_4.
>
> Yes. I guess you can select one or the other, but you cannot have both 
> at the same time. They are and should be mutually exclusive.

Agreed.


> The iMX BSP from Freescale (which they have not merged out yet), there 
> are two selectable profiles; one for qtopia 2 and one for qtopia 4, so I 
>  guess both are in active use.

That's reasonable, but they should only be using a single PKG_QTOPIA 
symbol IMHO.

> > I would be tempted to remove qtopia-2 except that qtopia-4 is so very 
> > large compared with 2, and the imx platforms by default actually 
> > select qtopia-2.  I must admit though I've never used either.
> >
> > FYI: when you say: ./ltib -p <pkg> it looks inside all the spec file 
> > names to find a match in the "Name:" field.  This is a convenience for 
> > single package mode.  If you want to exactly select a package you need 
> > to say ./ltib -p <spefiliename> (e.g. include .spec).  When you just 
> > run ./ltib the mapping is done using the appropriate selection and 
> > pkg_map files.
> >
> > Regards, Stuart

Regarss, Stuart