[3/3] docbook-sgml-dtd-3.1-native.bb: Add real PV inside the recipe

Submitted by Emilia Ciobanu on July 10, 2013, 3:07 p.m.

Details

Message ID bf65f77f194b7e5a9047a2196e87a2d59f8e0e6b.1373468672.git.emilia.maria.silvia.ciobanu@intel.com
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

Emilia Ciobanu July 10, 2013, 3:07 p.m.
Signed-off-by: Emilia Ciobanu <emilia.maria.silvia.ciobanu@intel.com>
---
 .../docbook-sgml-dtd-3.1-native.bb                 |    1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

Patch hide | download patch | download mbox

diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/docbook-sgml-dtd/docbook-sgml-dtd-3.1-native.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/docbook-sgml-dtd/docbook-sgml-dtd-3.1-native.bb
index a7df4f9..869bffe 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-devtools/docbook-sgml-dtd/docbook-sgml-dtd-3.1-native.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/docbook-sgml-dtd/docbook-sgml-dtd-3.1-native.bb
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@  LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://LICENSE-OASIS;md5=c608985dd5f7f215e669e7639a0b1d2e"
 DTD_VERSION = "3.1"
 
 PR = "${INC_PR}.0"
+PV = "31"
 
 # Note: the upstream sources are not distributed with a license file.
 # LICENSE-OASIS is included as a "patch" to workaround this. When

Comments

Trevor Woerner July 11, 2013, 8:57 a.m.
On 10 July 2013 16:07, Emilia Ciobanu
<emilia.maria.silvia.ciobanu@intel.com> wrote:
>  PR = "${INC_PR}.0"
> +PV = "31"


I thought the general trend was to move away from real PVs to the
autoincrementer? I'm just curious to know what issue prompted the move
back to real PVs?
Emilia Ciobanu July 11, 2013, 9:55 a.m.
Hi Trevor,

I think this is a misunderstanding. We are currently using the autoincrementation
mechanism for the PR of the packages and not for the PV.  In this case the PV variable
was missing from the recipe.

Thanks,
Ema

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Trevor Woerner [mailto:trevor.woerner@linaro.org]
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 11:58 AM
> To: Ciobanu, Emilia Maria Silvia
> Cc: openembedded-core
> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 3/3] docbook-sgml-dtd-3.1-native.bb: Add
> real PV inside the recipe
> 
> On 10 July 2013 16:07, Emilia Ciobanu
> <emilia.maria.silvia.ciobanu@intel.com> wrote:
> >  PR = "${INC_PR}.0"
> > +PV = "31"
> 
> 
> I thought the general trend was to move away from real PVs to the
> autoincrementer? I'm just curious to know what issue prompted the move
> back to real PVs?
Trevor Woerner July 11, 2013, 9:57 a.m.
On 11 July 2013 10:55, Ciobanu, Emilia Maria Silvia
<emilia.maria.silvia.ciobanu@intel.com> wrote:
> I think this is a misunderstanding. We are currently using the autoincrementation
> mechanism for the PR of the packages and not for the PV.  In this case the PV variable
> was missing from the recipe.


Whoops! Yes I see. Sorry about that :-)