On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 at 15:53, Derek Straka <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for your note. I’m working through the remaining downstream recipe > changes today which should address the rest of the UNKNOWN_BROKEN recipes. > > While looking at it yesterday, the download packages come primarily in two > archetypes: > 1. Those that replace ‘_’ with ‘-‘ in the source archives > 2. Those that leave the ‘_’ ONLY in the archives > > Given that, I think it’s unlikely there’s a clean fix in the bbclass without > a more invasive change to the upstream check logic. I can, however, package > all the changes for one-core into a single patchset and submit a v2. That > will at least address all the core updates in one fell swoop. > > Does that sound reasonable?
Seems so, yes. Historically pypi upstream checks have been a pain, as there has been a constant stream of seemingly random breaking changes, of two types: 1. _ being replaced by - and vice versa 2. CamelCasing being replaced by lowercasing and vice versa. I haven't been able to figure out any pattern in this, or come up with a universal check. If you can simply fix up core recipes to not return UNKNOWN_BROKEN, I'd appreciate. Alex
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#208686): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/208686 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/110085421/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
