Agreed.  It's painful at times because there isn't a complete
standardization in pypi naming conventions.  I' sent a v2 that is intended
to resolve all of the oe-core UNKNOWN_BROKEN python recipes.  I'll move to
those in meta-python next.

On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 9:15 AM Alexander Kanavin <[email protected]>
wrote:

> 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 (#208688): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/208688
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]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to