|
Re: Yocto post-release CVE and package uprev policy - openssl, ffmpeg, etc.
We have made exceptions in the past for exactly the reasons you outline.
Unfortunately I know at least for OpenSSL when we have done so on at least one
occasion we have been bitten by compatibility
We have made exceptions in the past for exactly the reasons you outline.
Unfortunately I know at least for OpenSSL when we have done so on at least one
occasion we have been bitten by compatibility
|
By
Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@...>
·
#400
·
|
|
Re: Yocto post-release CVE and package uprev policy - openssl, ffmpeg, etc.
If upstream claims j->k release to just have CVE changesets may be its
not a problem, however if there are more fixes that comes along with
CVEs then we need to understand closely what these fixes are
If upstream claims j->k release to just have CVE changesets may be its
not a problem, however if there are more fixes that comes along with
CVEs then we need to understand closely what these fixes are
|
By
Khem Raj
·
#399
·
|
|
Re: [OE-core] OpenEmbedded Stand at FOSDEM
Nobody?
Andreas
By
Andreas Müller <schnitzeltony@...>
·
#398
·
|
|
Yocto post-release CVE and package uprev policy - openssl, ffmpeg, etc.
Yocto seems to have a policy not to update packages once a
release is generally available. I think that rule should be
broken for certain packages that have been reviewed and tested
properly.
See:
Yocto seems to have a policy not to update packages once a
release is generally available. I think that rule should be
broken for certain packages that have been reviewed and tested
properly.
See:
|
By
Randy MacLeod
·
#397
·
|
|
Re: Recipe Specific Sysroots - An Update
I did write up the specifics of the implementation details into the
main commit message for the change. For layer maintainers, the key
piece were these points:
* Recipes may fail with missing
I did write up the specifics of the implementation details into the
main commit message for the change. For layer maintainers, the key
piece were these points:
* Recipes may fail with missing
|
By
Richard Purdie
·
#396
·
|
|
Re: Recipe Specific Sysroots - An Update
Thanks, Richard!
Will there be some sort of write-up detailing any work required for other
layers to adapt to this change? Thanks.
--
Denys
Thanks, Richard!
Will there be some sort of write-up detailing any work required for other
layers to adapt to this change? Thanks.
--
Denys
|
By
Denys Dmytriyenko
·
#395
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
Agreed, that's even better.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no
Agreed, that's even better.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no
|
By
Patrick Ohly
·
#394
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
I tend to agree with the expanded "package", I keep reading "PS" as any
number of random things ... including "professional services".
Cheers,
Bruce
--
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for
I tend to agree with the expanded "package", I keep reading "PS" as any
number of random things ... including "professional services".
Cheers,
Bruce
--
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for
|
By
Bruce Ashfield
·
#393
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
PACKAGE_SCRIPTS_DEPENDS maps better to what they are intended to be
used for, I think.
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br
PACKAGE_SCRIPTS_DEPENDS maps better to what they are intended to be
used for, I think.
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br
|
By
Otavio Salvador
·
#392
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
Looking at this description, it is not at all clear to me why the
variable is named PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPENDS. From the description, the
things listed in it are dependencies of do_rootfs, not
Looking at this description, it is not at all clear to me why the
variable is named PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPENDS. From the description, the
things listed in it are dependencies of do_rootfs, not
|
By
Patrick Ohly
·
#391
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
I agree with stripping out the task piece, I was planning to work
something out with that. We could do with this cleanup in other places
too.
Not all have the form -native (we have some -cross) and I
I agree with stripping out the task piece, I was planning to work
something out with that. We could do with this cleanup in other places
too.
Not all have the form -native (we have some -cross) and I
|
By
Richard Purdie
·
#390
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
or PS_DEPENDS with the manual defining PS
and users thinking that it means any of:
Package Script / Populate Sysroot / Post Script
Also, all of Jussi's package changes are of the form:
or PS_DEPENDS with the manual defining PS
and users thinking that it means any of:
Package Script / Populate Sysroot / Post Script
Also, all of Jussi's package changes are of the form:
|
By
Randy MacLeod
·
#389
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
<jussi.kukkonen@...> wrote:
What about DEPENDS_PKG_SCRIPTS ?
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile:
<jussi.kukkonen@...> wrote:
What about DEPENDS_PKG_SCRIPTS ?
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile:
|
By
Otavio Salvador
·
#388
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
Richard asked me to test this and look at the remaining unhandled postinstalls. I've now done that, patches for the missing PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS are in the "jku/wip-rss" branch in poky-contrib
Richard asked me to test this and look at the remaining unhandled postinstalls. I've now done that, patches for the missing PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS are in the "jku/wip-rss" branch in poky-contrib
|
By
Jussi Kukkonen <jussi.kukkonen@...>
·
#387
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
Yes, there is. do_some_task[depends] += "some-recipe:some_other_task".
DEPENDS is just a neat way of setting [depends] on do_configure to the list of recipes in DEPENDS's do_populate_sysroot
Yes, there is. do_some_task[depends] += "some-recipe:some_other_task".
DEPENDS is just a neat way of setting [depends] on do_configure to the list of recipes in DEPENDS's do_populate_sysroot
|
By
Burton, Ross <ross.burton@...>
·
#386
·
|
|
Recipe Specific Sysroots - An Update
http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=rpurdie/wip-rss
I've been quiet on this for a while but the patches are progressing and
I've been keeping this branch updated. Its proving a
http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=rpurdie/wip-rss
I've been quiet on this for a while but the patches are progressing and
I've been keeping this branch updated. Its proving a
|
By
Richard Purdie
·
#385
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
...
Is there not already a mechanism for generically saying "I need <this> task of
<that> recipe to be completed before my <such-and-such> task can run" of which
DEPENDS and RDEPENDS are simply
...
Is there not already a mechanism for generically saying "I need <this> task of
<that> recipe to be completed before my <such-and-such> task can run" of which
DEPENDS and RDEPENDS are simply
|
By
Trevor Woerner
·
#384
·
|
|
Re: [OE-core] Patchwork and incoming patch testing
Is the testing process for OE patches formalized?
I'm not referring to the Yocto Project's release testing.
Is the testing process for OE patches formalized?
I'm not referring to the Yocto Project's release testing.
|
By
Trevor Woerner
·
#383
·
|
|
Re: Package postinstall dependencies - Introduction of PACKAGE_WRITE_DEPS
The sysroot requirements are actually quite varied. It really helps to
think about this from a task perspective which is how bitbake really
works.
In order to run do_fetch, there could be tools like
The sysroot requirements are actually quite varied. It really helps to
think about this from a task perspective which is how bitbake really
works.
In order to run do_fetch, there could be tools like
|
By
Richard Purdie
·
#382
·
|
|
Re: Layer index enhancements
I was wrong about this - the collection name is collected and used in the
dependency resolution. New layers / branches should have this information
populated, however we haven't collected collection
I was wrong about this - the collection name is collected and used in the
dependency resolution. New layers / branches should have this information
populated, however we haven't collected collection
|
By
Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@...>
·
#381
·
|