Bug 115 - Improve capabilities for updating & extending the SDK after installation
Summary: Improve capabilities for updating & extending the SDK after installation
Status: VERIFIED DUPLICATE of bug 6559
Alias: None
Product: OE-Core
Classification: Build System, Metadata & Runtime
Component: devtools / tool chain (show other bugs)
Version: 1.7
Hardware: x86 Multiple
: Medium+ enhancement
Target Milestone: 1.7 M2
Assignee: Richard Purdie
QA Contact: Alexandru Georgescu
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-07-16 04:57 UTC by Joshua Lock - Disabled
Modified: 2015-08-07 12:51 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

See Also:
OS type for building Yocto: ---
Type of Regression: ---
Verified:
Documentation change: Yes (doc changes required)

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Joshua Lock - Disabled 2010-07-16 04:57:30 UTC 

    


    


      



        
          Comment 1
        

        
          Paul Eggleton

        

        
        

        
          2014-06-11 21:03:49 UTC
        

      






Currently we put the SDK under package management control. This has a variety of drawbacks and is hard to the central admin/distro engineer to deploy to users, user feedback as not been positive.

One alternative proposal is to put the files under control of something more like sstate. The resononing is that sstate is how we solved a very similar problem within the build system itself. There, we set out on a journey with "packaged staging" and ended up throwing away the package maager and using something specifically engineered for the problem. The premise is we have a similar issue here and we'd prefer to get to the better conclusion without the 4 different versions. The advantage of sstate is strong interaction with the main builds by using the same processes (see bug X). Locked sstate is obviously a key part of this proposal.

    


    


      



        
          Comment 2
        

        
          Paul Eggleton

        

        
        

        
          2014-06-13 10:38:33 UTC
        

      






For "see bug X" above read "see bug 6435".

    


    


      



        
          Comment 3
        

        
          Richard Purdie

        

        
        

        
          2014-07-25 16:48:39 UTC
        

      






6559 now has the plans for this

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 6559 ***

    


    


      



        
          Comment 4
        

        
          Alexandru Georgescu

        

        
        

        
          2014-09-10 11:40:50 UTC
        

      






Verified as per above comments.