| Summary: | Binary level package selection and configuration tool. | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Runtime] Package Management Issues | Reporter: | venkata ramana g <venkatarg> | ||||
| Component: | package-management-issues | Assignee: | Unassigned <unassigned> | ||||
| Status: | RESOLVED OBSOLETE | QA Contact: | |||||
| Severity: | enhancement | ||||||
| Priority: | Low | CC: | bluelightning, corneliux.stoicescu, hongxu.jia, irfan.rehman, mark.hatle, poky.bs.watcher, poky.watcher, Qi.Chen, randy.macleod, richard.purdie, sanil.kumar, tom.zanussi, valentin.popa | ||||
| Version: | 1.4 | ||||||
| Target Milestone: | Future | ||||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||
| OS: | Multiple | ||||||
| URL: | https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Binary_configuration_support | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| OS type for building Yocto: | --- | Type of Regression: | --- | ||||
| Verified: | Documentation change: | Don't know | |||||
| Bug Depends on: | 4728 | ||||||
| Bug Blocks: | 4729 | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
venkata ramana g
2012-10-09 06:54:47 UTC
Venkata, This is too broad as a requirement so mark it for future. But if you have anything specific that you think is a 1.4 candidate, could you please file more specific bugs for them? Thanks, Jessica Posted RFC: Post build configuration. https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2013-March/015095.html Looking forward this enhancement as part of 1.5 Working to make a prototype, with a configuration file and command line interface to configure. Reclassifying (since this is not related to Hob) and moving to 1.5 as requested. Develop post build configuration platform which supports extending the configurations for various configuration needs. The platform should 1. support various package level and image level binary configurations. 2. work with poky and outside poky at binary level. 3. support Configuration file format, Human readable and writable. Created attachment 1267 [details]
Sample configuration file format to meet configuration needs
# Description : This is a sample format, only for reference however actual functions configuration funtions will differ
# version : 0.1
#
# BNF for conf file:
#
# sectiondef : '[' sectioninfo ']' [statements]
# statements : [ statement ]*
# statement : operation '(' [paramlist] ')'
# operation : identifier
# paramlist : param [, param ]*
# param : directparam | fullparam | embstatement
# directparam : nondelimiters | '"' anycharcters '"'
# fullparam : identifier '=' (directparam | embstatement)
# embstatement : statement
# identifier : [ alphanums_-. ]
# nondelimiters : <anycharcters except [ or ( or " or , or ) or ] >
Configuration support contains following components:
ConfFile - Configuration file
ConfLib - Various Configuration methods supported, contains both package level
and image level configurations.
ConfParser - Parser for configuration file, as per its Conf BNF
ConfApply - Support applying the configuration options on the image
ConfQuery - Support querying various configuration options/data from Conf file,
after parsing the conf file.
(also can provide interface to update the conf file from UI tool
in future)
ConfDoc - Prints the list of various configuration methods supported as part
of ConfLib and thier usage. Help information.
Please find the design details of the feature @ https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Binary_configuration_support There is likely still a need for something like this but the people, ideas and exact requirements have changed in the 10 years since. I think it would make sense to restart any efforts in this area from a fresh perspective although ideas can be taken from the info here. I've CCed Hongxu, since he wrote much of the Linux Assembly Tool ( https://github.com/Wind-River/meta-lat ) so if people are interested, they can take a look at that layer. Also Hongxu might want to look at the requirements here to see if there are ideas that could be implemented in LAT. I'm not suggesting that there are since only know a tiny bit about LAT. The world has changed since this issue was raised and we'd need to re-evaluate the proposal. |