[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH V3 2/2] script/feeds: add a new command that allows generating a new feeds.conf

[Jonas Gorski]

On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 15:16, John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 05/06/2019 15:11, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 14:58, John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 05/06/2019 14:54, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 14:33, John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> wrote:
> >>>> On 05/06/2019 13:35, Karl Palsson wrote:
> >>>>> John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 05/06/2019 12:17, Karl Palsson wrote:
> >>>>>>> John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> This can be used inside build setups for easy feeds.conf
> >>>>>>>> generation.
> >>>>>>> Could you give us an example of how this is actually easy, or
> >>>>>>> what sort of functionality this is providing beyond "cat
> >>>>>>> feeds.conf.default feeds.conf.extra > feeds.conf"
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It seems like a lot of perl for a narrow usecase.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sincerely,
> >>>>>>> Karl Palsson
> >>>>>> This was brought up as a missing feature by the prpl folks. I
> >>>>>> considered on how to best implement this and find that having
> >>>>>> proper tooling is much better than having to carry around an
> >>>>>> extra file that is cat. being able to build the feeds.conf
> >>>>>> dynamically like this just seems much cleaner to me and will
> >>>>>> allow downstream users, vendors, odms and integrators to have
> >>>>>> less need to patch their trees to death.
> >>>>> So, they still have to have a script, but now the script has...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>> ./scripts/feeds setup -b src-git,private-aa,git://blah
> >>>>> src-link,private-bb,/wop/blah
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> instead of
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>> cp feeds.conf.default feeds.conf
> >>>>> echo "src-git private-aa git://blah" >> feeds.conf
> >>>>> echo "src-link private-bb /wop/blah" >> feeds.conf
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I mean, _yes_ it's "simpler" but it's only simpler by bringing in
> >>>>> new tools with new layers of abstraction. I really question
> >>>>> whether that's actually simpler for anyone in the long run, and
> >>>>> also how this really counts as a "missing feature" There's still
> >>>>> going to be a requirement for that vendor script.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sincerely,
> >>>>> Karl Palsson
> >>>> Its not a new tool, its an extra call to an already existing one. I
> >>>> believe that the one liner is much cleaner than the 3 line scriptage.
> >>>> there is no requirement for a vendor script. they ship with a PDF that
> >>>> has the build steps. This oneline will be much easier to use I believe.
> >>> Since the use case is having additional custom feeds to the normal
> >>> package feeds, maybe it would make more sense to have a e.g.
> >>> feeds.conf.custom that is used as an addition to the
> >>> feeds.conf.default instead of completely replacing it. That way you
> >>> would avoid missing upstream changes in the feeds.conf.default when
> >>> updating your build environment.
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> The patch does not manipulate the default file at all.
> >>
> >>
> >>> Then we could add a few commands to scripts/feeds for manipulating
> >>> that feeds.conf.custom (adding/removing feeds, changing their
> >>> types/addresses/names etc).
> >> so instead of using script/commands to create the already existing
> >> feeds.conf file we should introduce a 3rd file ? that makes no sense to me.
> > No, in that case there would be no feeds.conf. Just feeds.conf.default
> > + feeds.conf.custom (a "diff"), so still only two files. Different
> > name to not break existing feeds.conf setups. Or add a marker to
> > feeds.conf to mark it as a "snippet/diff". Or maybe use the include
> > thing proposed by Bjørn at the top line of the generated feeds.conf.
> >
> > So the feeds.conf generated by your command would then be
> >
> > src-include feeds.conf.default
> > src-git custom_stuff git://example.com:foo
> >
> > avoiding having to have a local, unchanging copy of contents of
> > feeds.conf.default in there.
> >
> > A bit like we split up the opkg feeds configuration to basic/dist
> > feeds files and custom feeds file.
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > Jonas
>
>
> That will yet again require an additional git tree, which is not
> deployable inside a tar file + pdf and is voodoo to the users. I do like
> the idea though, but it is fitting for a foss developer and not a
> corporate coder.

??? Where does the additional git tree come from?

If the feeds.conf.default doesn't change, that's fine. But not having
the default feeds in a (local) configuration file has the advantage
that if you e.g. update your base distribution/sdk from e.g. 19.06 to
19.12, you don't need to update your feeds.conf to point to the 19.12
branches. Or re-create it.

Jonas

_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel