Hi Darcy,

On 8/10/21 6:16 PM, Darcy Watkins wrote:

Hi,

 

Does anyone know how long (or how many releases) that the old override
syntax will still be supported?  (Like a deprecation EOL cycle).

 

A corollary question: How far back in old releases is the new syntax
supported?

 

This potentially affects layers that have a single branch that support
multiple versions of Yocto/OE.

IANTM (I Am Not The Maintainers!), but I know that the old override
syntax will be supported in the maintained releases as long as they are
supported:

* Dunfell 3.1, Long Term Support
* Gatesgarth 3.2, now reaching end of life as written on
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Releases
* Hardknott 3.3, the latest version, still supported.

I know I haven't replied to your first question yet, so here's a
question for other people on the list...

Where can we find until when the current releases are going to be
supported? Such information doesn't appear on
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Releases

To reply to your second question, I believe the new syntax will be
supported in the upcoming updates to  Dunfell 3.1, Gatesgarth 3.2
(provided an update release is made), Hardknott 3.3 and of course in the
upcoming Honister 3.4 release.

I hope this helps. I'm trying to get an answer to the end-of-life question.

Cheers,
Michael.

--
Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

Hi again Darcy,

On 8/10/21 6:35 PM, Michael Opdenacker wrote:

Where can we find until when the current releases are going to be
supported? Such information doesn't appear on
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Releases

I haven't managed to get such information yet, so I opened a bug to make
sure I get an answer by Thursday, when we have our bug triage meeting.

Here's the bug: https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14503
Don't hesitate to subscribe to it.

Cheers
Michael.

--
Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

Hi,

My apologies. I don't think I made my question clear. I am asking about the compatibility of old style override syntax moving forward (and new style syntax in old versions).

So if I continue using the old style override syntax (to ensure sure compatibility for use with older Yocto versions), at what future Yocto/OE release do you expect that old style override syntax will become erroneous (as opposed to say triggering deprecation warnings, etc)?

Is support for the new style override syntax present in any existing Yocto/OpenEmbedded releases (in other words, has it been there for a while, but we are just now actively migrating to use it)? If so, how far back does it go?


Regards,

Darcy

Darcy Watkins :: Senior Staff Engineer, Firmware

SIERRA WIRELESS
Direct +1 604 233 7989 :: Fax +1 604 231 1109 :: Main +1 604 231 1100
13811 Wireless Way :: Richmond, BC Canada V6V 3A4
[M4]
dwatkins@... :: www.sierrawireless.com <http://www.sierrawireless.com/>

On 2021-08-10, 10:17 AM, "Michael Opdenacker" <michael.opdenacker@...> wrote:

Hi again Darcy,

On 8/10/21 6:35 PM, Michael Opdenacker wrote:
> Where can we find until when the current releases are going to be
> supported? Such information doesn't appear on
> https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.yoctoproject.org%2Fwiki%2FReleases&;data=04%7C01%7Cdwatkins%40sierrawireless.com%7C672b1b0d748041f1a5e108d95c22b3d0%7C08059a4c248643dd89e33a747e0dcbe8%7C1%7C0%7C637642126398105344%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=yqtJtouZsl7JBRtIfvYrRNmNAIa40d5vyk5%2BZl0sy7g%3D&amp;reserved=0

I haven't managed to get such information yet, so I opened a bug to make
sure I get an answer by Thursday, when we have our bug triage meeting.

Here's the bug: https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.yoctoproject.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D14503&;data=04%7C01%7Cdwatkins%40sierrawireless.com%7C672b1b0d748041f1a5e108d95c22b3d0%7C08059a4c248643dd89e33a747e0dcbe8%7C1%7C0%7C637642126398105344%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=cyIznH%2F%2B%2BPzccxcue710LByZiJGI9tx7%2B4fiyLK6Ba8%3D&amp;reserved=0
Don't hesitate to subscribe to it.

Cheers
Michael.

--
Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbootlin.com%2F&;data=04%7C01%7Cdwatkins%40sierrawireless.com%7C672b1b0d748041f1a5e108d95c22b3d0%7C08059a4c248643dd89e33a747e0dcbe8%7C1%7C0%7C637642126398105344%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=N2uSry78vScI0moDWsDvzJCT53avVXzvIBoY9P9Vn7U%3D&amp;reserved=0

Hi Darcy,

On 8/10/21 7:51 PM, Darcy Watkins wrote:

Hi,

My apologies. I don't think I made my question clear. I am asking about the compatibility of old style override syntax moving forward (and new style syntax in old versions).

So if I continue using the old style override syntax (to ensure sure compatibility for use with older Yocto versions), at what future Yocto/OE release do you expect that old style override syntax will become erroneous (as opposed to say triggering deprecation warnings, etc)?

If I understood correctly, the old style will continue to be supported
in 3.1 and in 3.3, as long as these releases are supported (that's what
I'm trying to find out). These versions will support both syntaxes
actually.

However, from 3.4 on, only the new syntax will be supported.

Is support for the new style override syntax present in any existing Yocto/OpenEmbedded releases (in other words, has it been there for a while, but we are just now actively migrating to use it)? If so, how far back does it go?

No, we don't have any releases yet with the new syntax. The next dot
update to Dunfell is planned on 2021/9/24, and that's when you'll have a
release with both syntaxes supported. Dunfell is supposed to be
supported for at least 2 years, that is until Apr. 2022.

Cheers,
Michael.

--
Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

On Tue, 2021-08-10 at 17:51 +0000, Darcy Watkins wrote:

My apologies. I don't think I made my question clear. I am asking about the 
compatibility of old style override syntax moving forward (and new style syntax
in old versions).

So if I continue using the old style override syntax (to ensure sure 
compatibility for use with older Yocto versions), at what future Yocto/OE 
release do you expect that old style override syntax will become erroneous 
(as opposed to say triggering deprecation warnings, etc)?

Is support for the new style override syntax present in any existing 
Yocto/OpenEmbedded releases (in other words, has it been there for a while, 
but we are just now actively migrating to use it)? If so, how far back does it go?

The new syntax will work on the dunfell, gatesgarth, hardknott, master and new 
release branches going forward. That applies now and that support will be in the
next point releases for dunfell (3.1.11) and hardknott (3.3.3).

The old syntax is no longer supported in master as of now and will not be supported
in new releases going forward. It continues to work fine in older releases prior
to the next new release series (honister).

Cheers,

Richard

Hi Richard,

On 8/10/21 10:21 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:

On Tue, 2021-08-10 at 17:51 +0000, Darcy Watkins wrote:

My apologies. I don't think I made my question clear. I am asking about the 
compatibility of old style override syntax moving forward (and new style syntax
in old versions).

So if I continue using the old style override syntax (to ensure sure 
compatibility for use with older Yocto versions), at what future Yocto/OE 
release do you expect that old style override syntax will become erroneous 
(as opposed to say triggering deprecation warnings, etc)?

Is support for the new style override syntax present in any existing 
Yocto/OpenEmbedded releases (in other words, has it been there for a while, 
but we are just now actively migrating to use it)? If so, how far back does it go?

The new syntax will work on the dunfell, gatesgarth, hardknott, master and new 
release branches going forward. That applies now and that support will be in the
next point releases for dunfell (3.1.11) and hardknott (3.3.3).

Thank you for the clarification.

Why do you mention Gatesgarth (3.2) while no update release is in sight?
According to https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Releases, it's already
end of life.

Cheers,
Michael.

--
Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

On Wed, 2021-08-11 at 10:18 +0200, Michael Opdenacker wrote:

Hi Richard,

On 8/10/21 10:21 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:

On Tue, 2021-08-10 at 17:51 +0000, Darcy Watkins wrote:

My apologies. I don't think I made my question clear. I am asking about the 
compatibility of old style override syntax moving forward (and new style syntax
in old versions).

So if I continue using the old style override syntax (to ensure sure 
compatibility for use with older Yocto versions), at what future Yocto/OE 
release do you expect that old style override syntax will become erroneous 
(as opposed to say triggering deprecation warnings, etc)?

Is support for the new style override syntax present in any existing 
Yocto/OpenEmbedded releases (in other words, has it been there for a while, 
but we are just now actively migrating to use it)? If so, how far back does it go?

The new syntax will work on the dunfell, gatesgarth, hardknott, master and new 
release branches going forward. That applies now and that support will be in the
next point releases for dunfell (3.1.11) and hardknott (3.3.3).

Thank you for the clarification.

Why do you mention Gatesgarth (3.2) while no update release is in sight?
According to https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Releases, it's already
end of life.

I mention is as if I didn't someone would ask about it. I did backport the change
to the corresponding bitbake branch and it hence made it to the poky branch for
gatesgarth but there are no plans for any further 3.2 releases.

Cheers,

Richard