[yocto] The term Package as used in the YP docs

[Brian Lloyd]

>From the perspective of a new, easily confused and overwhelmed user, I
whole heartedly agree with the index entry.  And now it makes sense why
there is a PV to store version of a recipe.


On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 18:46 +0000, Rifenbark, Scott M wrote:
> Rudolf, 
> 
>  
> 
> This is good feedback on the descriptions for the variable names
> Rudolf.  I did try and clean things up there a bit. 
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Scott
> 
>  
> 
> From: rstreif at linuxfoundation.org [mailto:rstreif at linuxfoundation.org]
> On Behalf Of Rudolf Streif
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 11:45 AM
> To: Rifenbark, Scott M
> Cc: Paul Eggleton; yocto at yoctoproject.org
> Subject: Re: [yocto] The term Package as used in the YP docs
> 
> 
>  
> 
> I am not advocating changing the variable names. I know that this is a
> huge undertaking and prone to many problems. This probably one of the
> many legacy things people will have to live with and understand. In
> most cases recipe name and version exactly reflect the name and
> version of the package it is intended to build which to some extend
> mitigates the issue.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> As far as the Terms section in the manuals is concerned, I see that
> you already changed the describing text for the variables. That's
> sufficient, I think.
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> :rjs
> 
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Rifenbark, Scott M
> <scott.m.rifenbark at intel.com> wrote:
> 
> I have tried to weed out the ambiguous use of "package" for this
> upcoming version of the manual set.  I don't think I would want to
> suggest changing any of the "P*" type variable names in the code.  I
> agree with Paul here that the potential for really messing things up
> out-weighs any other benefit.  This is why I was trying to worm in a
> bit of history behind those names for the people that might struggle
> like me.
> 
> Scott
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yocto-bounces at yoctoproject.org
> [mailto:yocto-bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Paul Eggleton
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 11:34 AM
> To: Rudolf Streif
> Cc: yocto at yoctoproject.org
> Subject: Re: [yocto] The term Package as used in the YP docs
> 
> 
> On Friday 28 September 2012 11:27:37 Rudolf Streif wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > I agree with Scott's definition. In the general Linux context a
> Package is
> > a compilation of binaries, documentation, development files, etc.
> wrapped
> > up in a format that can be used by a package management system to
> install
> > it on a target system.
> 
> No dispute there.
> 
> > It is somewhat confusing that YP and OE use the term 'package'
> synonymously
> > with 'recipe'. In most cases a package is the output of a recipe.
> 
> The thing is, we no longer do that - we've fixed a number of
> references in the
> documentation, help text and error messages for this release so that
> "recipe"
> is used when that's what we mean. If we've left any references that
> should be
> considered a bug.
> 
> > Unfortunately, changing variables like P, PN, PV, PR etc.
> > may cause some pain. If a transition is what the broader community
> would
> > like to achieve then a period where old and new variables can be
> used
> > interchangeably (if possible) would be the way to go.
> 
> I'm not sure there's a huge amount to be gained by doing this when
> weighed
> against the cost - it would certainly cause a massive amount of churn,
> with
> the potential for problems with layer interaction where one layer has
> done the
> big rename and another that bbappends recipes in the first hasn't.
> 
> Cheers,
> Paul
> 
> --
> 
> Paul Eggleton
> Intel Open Source Technology Centre
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto