Hi,

On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 11:43:32AM +0000, Jose Quaresma wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> At Foundries.io we intend to update the docker version on the kirkstone
> branch to the latest available upstream, currently v23.
> Looks like the better approach can be doing that in the mixin layer,
> for that a new kirstone lts branch will be required.

FWIW, meta-virtualization master branch works well with kirkstone and
docker can be updated that way.

Many layers remove layer compatibility with older LTS releases even when
technically recipes still work, at least with very few exceptions.

> This requires a golang update as well but the golang on master is broken
> for some cases when -linkshared is in use and we are still debugging this
> issue.
> I pretend to start this backport when I can stabilize first the golang 1.20
> on master.

Cherry-picking go patches from poky master to kirkstone also works once
the kirkstone specific security updates have been reverted.

Even if Alex disagrees, CVE patch backporting is needed when SW
components break APIs and ABIs between releases. For mature and API/ABI
compatible SW components the updates are trivial, but even with them
there are exceptions and surprises.

I think yocto maintainers can make sensible decisions and compromises for SW
components and features which get updates vs which get CVE security patches. I
think many "development only" tools can also be updated quite freely
also in LTS branches. For example CVE and SPDX tooling, maybe even
bitbake itself, git, subversion etc. gcc and libc do break things on major 
updates, same for
clang. go, rust, perl, python have possibly more stable updates so those
could be aligned with all maintained branches. If no-one is posting CVE
patches for complex SW components to LTS branches then I'd update them
to latest release or even master branch rather than keep the affected
CVEs open for ever. If there are not enough maintainers/resources, then even
breaking the API compatibility is ok. nodejs, rust, go, webkit, tiff etc are
really pain to maintain and thus updating them to latest release should be
considered even if APIs change.

Cheers,

-Mikko
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#178105): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/178105
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/97444547/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to