Re: zypper and poky architectures

Qing He <qing.he@...>

On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 19:21 +0800, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 16:33 +0800, Qing He wrote:
I recently reported several zypper bugs specifically for arm, after
some deeper investigation, the problem seems to be of higher level than
I originally thought.

The root cause is that zypper and poky use different way to represent
architectures, as we are putting them together, these two ways are
not compatible, causing many minor glitches that need to modify at
least one of them.

Poky has three kinds of representations in a single target image, which
are independent, cpu-dependent and machine-dependent (all, armv5te,
qemuarm, respectively), e.g.


(note that armv5te is the same with gcc's -march option, meaning little
This is a good analysis and summary. It actually gets more complicated
as for some machines we have a long list of compatible package types
that can be installed, e.g. for qemuarm, if you list PACKAGE_ARCHES
you'll see armv4t armv5 armv5t armv5te which are all accepted by the
opkg backend.
Zypper also does something similar:

defCompatibleWith(_armv5tejl, _noarch,_armv3l,_armv4l,_armv4tl,_armv5l,_armv5tel);

Currently, at least zypper is broken on all of mips, arm, ppc, with
slightly different problems.

The ideal situation is to use consistent arch specification, the
following can be a solution:
1. rename *.all.rpm to *.noarch.rpm
This would only solve part of the problem though?
Yes, only a small part. And the way I prefer is to add an alias in zypper
instead of changing poky.

2. removing the concept of machine-dependent packages, change all
*.qemuarm.rpm to *.armv5te.rpm
This could mean making a copy of each rpm per machine so I'm not keen on

3. enhance zypper arch module, make the addition more flexible,
allowing arch alias (e.g. armv5te = armv5tel = armel = arm)

That would be some work to do, maybe 1.0 is a good time to get zypper
and package upgrade truely working.

Any ideas and comments?
I think we're going to have to teach zypper to read a list of compatible
"architectures" from a configuration file. There is a config file opkg
writes to the filesystem continaing this list and we'll have to do
similar for RPM.
The problem is that current zypper uses hardcoded "archs" and
compatibility list, i.e. at build time with C++ code. Changing it to
read the list at run time is probably substantial.

Another possibility is to generate the list at build time and do it by
scripts and conditional compiling, this does have the problem of
creating logically different versions for different archs.

It does raise the question of how given two possible rpm's it would
chose between the two (for opkg, the list is in order).

Is the problem just in zypper and is rpm free from any issues in this
I don't know much about rpm internals, there is a bug regarding the rpm,

But it looks fair limited in impact.


Join to automatically receive all group messages.