| .. SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-2.0-UK |
| |
| Recipe Style Guide |
| ****************** |
| |
| Recipe Naming Conventions |
| ========================= |
| |
| In general, most recipes should follow the naming convention |
| ``recipes-category/recipename/recipename_version.bb``. Recipes for related |
| projects may share the same recipe directory. ``recipename`` and ``category`` |
| may contain hyphens, but hyphens are not allowed in ``version``. |
| |
| If the recipe is tracking a Git revision that does not correspond to a released |
| version of the software, ``version`` may be ``git`` (e.g. ``recipename_git.bb``) |
| and the recipe would set :term:`PV`. |
| |
| Version Policy |
| ============== |
| |
| Our versions follow the form ``<epoch>:<version>-<revision>`` |
| or in BitBake variable terms ${:term:`PE`}:${:term:`PV`}-${:term:`PR`}. We |
| generally follow the `Debian <https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#version>`__ |
| version policy which defines these terms. |
| |
| In most cases the version :term:`PV` will be set automatically from the recipe |
| file name. It is recommended to use released versions of software as these are |
| revisions that upstream are expecting people to use. |
| |
| Recipe versions should always compare and sort correctly so that upgrades work |
| as expected. With conventional versions such as ``1.4`` upgrading ``to 1.5`` |
| this happens naturally, but some versions don't sort. For example, |
| ``1.5 Release Candidate 2`` could be written as ``1.5rc2`` but this sorts after |
| ``1.5``, so upgrades from feeds won't happen correctly. |
| |
| Instead the tilde (``~``) operator can be used, which sorts before the empty |
| string so ``1.5~rc2`` comes before ``1.5``. There is a historical syntax which |
| may be found where :term:`PV` is set as a combination of the prior version |
| ``+`` the pre-release version, for example ``PV=1.4+1.5rc2``. This is a valid |
| syntax but the tilde form is preferred. |
| |
| For version comparisons, the ``opkg-compare-versions`` program from |
| ``opkg-utils`` can be useful when attempting to determine how two version |
| numbers compare to each other. Our definitive version comparison algorithm is |
| the one within bitbake which aims to match those of the package managers and |
| Debian policy closely. |
| |
| When a recipe references a git revision that does not correspond to a released |
| version of software (e.g. is not a tagged version), the :term:`PV` variable |
| should include the Git revision using the following to make the |
| version clear:: |
| |
| PV = "<version>+git${SRCPV}" |
| |
| In this case, ``<version>`` should be the most recently released version of the |
| software from the current source revision (``git describe`` can be useful for |
| determining this). Whilst not recommended for published layers, this format is |
| also useful when using :term:`AUTOREV` to set the recipe to increment source |
| control revisions automatically, which can be useful during local development. |
| |
| Version Number Changes |
| ====================== |
| |
| The :term:`PR` variable is used to indicate different revisions of a recipe |
| that reference the same upstream source version. It can be used to force a |
| new version of a recipe to be installed onto a device from a package feed. |
| These once had to be set manually but in most cases these can now be set and |
| incremented automatically by a PR Server connected with a package feed. |
| |
| When :term:`PV` increases, any existing :term:`PR` value can and should be |
| removed. |
| |
| If :term:`PV` changes in such a way that it does not increase with respect to |
| the previous value, you need to increase :term:`PE` to ensure package managers |
| will upgrade it correctly. If unset you should set :term:`PE` to "1" since |
| the default of empty is easily confused with "0" depending on the package |
| manager. :term:`PE` can only have an integer value. |
| |
| Recipe formatting |
| ================= |
| |
| Variable Formatting |
| ------------------- |
| |
| - Variable assignment should a space around each side of the operator, e.g. |
| ``FOO = "bar"``, not ``FOO="bar"``. |
| |
| - Double quotes should be used on the right-hand side of the assignment, |
| e.g. ``FOO = "bar"`` not ``FOO = 'bar'`` |
| |
| - Spaces should be used for indenting variables, with 4 spaces per tab |
| |
| - Long variables should be split over multiple lines when possible by using |
| the continuation character (``\``) |
| |
| - When splitting a long variable over multiple lines, all continuation lines |
| should be indented (with spaces) to align with the start of the quote on the |
| first line:: |
| |
| FOO = "this line is \ |
| long \ |
| " |
| |
| Instead of:: |
| |
| FOO = "this line is \ |
| long \ |
| " |
| |
| Python Function formatting |
| -------------------------- |
| |
| - Spaces must be used for indenting Python code, with 4 spaces per tab |
| |
| Shell Function formatting |
| ------------------------- |
| |
| - The formatting of shell functions should be consistent within layers. |
| Some use tabs, some use spaces. |
| |
| Recipe metadata |
| =============== |
| |
| Required Variables |
| ------------------ |
| |
| The following variables should be included in all recipes: |
| |
| - :term:`SUMMARY`: a one line description of the upstream project |
| |
| - :term:`DESCRIPTION`: an extended description of the upstream project, |
| possibly with multiple lines. If no reasonable description can be written, |
| this may be omitted as it defaults to :term:`SUMMARY`. |
| |
| - :term:`HOMEPAGE`: the URL to the upstream projects homepage. |
| |
| - :term:`BUGTRACKER`: the URL upstream projects bug tracking website, |
| if applicable. |
| |
| Recipe Ordering |
| --------------- |
| |
| When a variable is defined in recipes and classes, variables should follow the |
| general order when possible: |
| |
| - :term:`SUMMARY` |
| - :term:`DESCRIPTION` |
| - :term:`HOMEPAGE` |
| - :term:`BUGTRACKER` |
| - :term:`SECTION` |
| - :term:`LICENSE` |
| - :term:`LIC_FILES_CHKSUM` |
| - :term:`DEPENDS` |
| - :term:`PROVIDES` |
| - :term:`PV` |
| - :term:`SRC_URI` |
| - :term:`SRCREV` |
| - :term:`S` |
| - ``inherit ...`` |
| - :term:`PACKAGECONFIG` |
| - Build class specific variables such as ``EXTRA_QMAKEVARS_POST`` and :term:`EXTRA_OECONF` |
| - Tasks such as :ref:`ref-tasks-configure` |
| - :term:`PACKAGE_ARCH` |
| - :term:`PACKAGES` |
| - :term:`FILES` |
| - :term:`RDEPENDS` |
| - :term:`RRECOMMENDS` |
| - :term:`RSUGGESTS` |
| - :term:`RPROVIDES` |
| - :term:`RCONFLICTS` |
| - :term:`BBCLASSEXTEND` |
| |
| There are some cases where ordering is important and these cases would override |
| this default order. Examples include: |
| |
| - :term:`PACKAGE_ARCH` needing to be set before ``inherit packagegroup`` |
| |
| Tasks should be ordered based on the order they generally execute. For commonly |
| used tasks this would be: |
| |
| - :ref:`ref-tasks-fetch` |
| - :ref:`ref-tasks-unpack` |
| - :ref:`ref-tasks-patch` |
| - :ref:`ref-tasks-prepare_recipe_sysroot` |
| - :ref:`ref-tasks-configure` |
| - :ref:`ref-tasks-compile` |
| - :ref:`ref-tasks-install` |
| - :ref:`ref-tasks-populate_sysroot` |
| - :ref:`ref-tasks-package` |
| |
| Custom tasks should be sorted similarly. |
| |
| Package specific variables are typically grouped together, e.g.:: |
| |
| RDEPENDS:${PN} = “foo” |
| RDEPENDS:${PN}-libs = “bar” |
| |
| RRECOMMENDS:${PN} = “one” |
| RRECOMMENDS:${PN}-libs = “two” |
| |
| Recipe License Fields |
| --------------------- |
| |
| Recipes need to define both the :term:`LICENSE` and |
| :term:`LIC_FILES_CHKSUM` variables: |
| |
| - :term:`LICENSE`: This variable specifies the license for the software. |
| If you do not know the license under which the software you are |
| building is distributed, you should go to the source code and look |
| for that information. Typical files containing this information |
| include ``COPYING``, :term:`LICENSE`, and ``README`` files. You could |
| also find the information near the top of a source file. For example, |
| given a piece of software licensed under the GNU General Public |
| License version 2, you would set :term:`LICENSE` as follows:: |
| |
| LICENSE = "GPL-2.0-only" |
| |
| The licenses you specify within :term:`LICENSE` can have any name as long |
| as you do not use spaces, since spaces are used as separators between |
| license names. For standard licenses, use the names of the files in |
| ``meta/files/common-licenses/`` or the :term:`SPDXLICENSEMAP` flag names |
| defined in ``meta/conf/licenses.conf``. |
| |
| - :term:`LIC_FILES_CHKSUM`: The OpenEmbedded build system uses this |
| variable to make sure the license text has not changed. If it has, |
| the build produces an error and it affords you the chance to figure |
| it out and correct the problem. |
| |
| You need to specify all applicable licensing files for the software. |
| At the end of the configuration step, the build process will compare |
| the checksums of the files to be sure the text has not changed. Any |
| differences result in an error with the message containing the |
| current checksum. For more explanation and examples of how to set the |
| :term:`LIC_FILES_CHKSUM` variable, see the |
| ":ref:`dev-manual/licenses:tracking license changes`" section. |
| |
| To determine the correct checksum string, you can list the |
| appropriate files in the :term:`LIC_FILES_CHKSUM` variable with incorrect |
| md5 strings, attempt to build the software, and then note the |
| resulting error messages that will report the correct md5 strings. |
| See the ":ref:`dev-manual/new-recipe:fetching code`" section for |
| additional information. |
| |
| Here is an example that assumes the software has a ``COPYING`` file:: |
| |
| LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=xxx" |
| |
| When you try to build the |
| software, the build system will produce an error and give you the |
| correct string that you can substitute into the recipe file for a |
| subsequent build. |
| |
| License Updates |
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
| |
| When you change the :term:`LICENSE` or :term:`LIC_FILES_CHKSUM` in the recipe |
| you need to briefly explain the reason for the change via a ``License-Update:`` |
| tag. Often it's quite trivial, such as:: |
| |
| License-Update: copyright years refreshed |
| |
| Less often, the actual licensing terms themselves will have changed. If so, do |
| try to link to upstream making/justifying that decision. |
| |
| Tips and Guidelines for Writing Recipes |
| --------------------------------------- |
| |
| - Use :term:`BBCLASSEXTEND` instead of creating separate recipes such as ``-native`` |
| and ``-nativesdk`` ones, whenever possible. This avoids having to maintain multiple |
| recipe files at the same time. |
| |
| - Recipes should have tasks which are idempotent, i.e. that executing a given task |
| multiple times shouldn't change the end result. The build environment is built upon |
| this assumption and breaking it can cause obscure build failures. |
| |
| - For idempotence when modifying files in tasks, it is usually best to: |
| |
| - copy a file ``X`` to ``X.orig`` (only if it doesn't exist already) |
| - then, copy ``X.orig`` back to ``X``, |
| - and, finally, modify ``X``. |
| |
| This ensures if rerun the task always has the same end result and the |
| original file can be preserved to reuse. It also guards against an |
| interrupted build corrupting the file. |
| |
| Patch Upstream Status |
| ===================== |
| |
| In order to keep track of patches applied by recipes and ultimately reduce the |
| number of patches that need maintaining, the OpenEmbedded build system |
| requires information about the upstream status of each patch. |
| |
| In its description, each patch should provide detailed information about the |
| bug that it addresses, such as the URL in a bug tracking system and links |
| to relevant mailing list archives. |
| |
| Then, you should also add an ``Upstream-Status:`` tag containing one of the |
| following status strings: |
| |
| ``Pending`` |
| No determination has been made yet, or patch has not yet been submitted to |
| upstream. |
| |
| Keep in mind that every patch submitted upstream reduces the maintainance |
| burden in OpenEmbedded and Yocto Project in the long run, so this patch |
| status should only be used in exceptional cases if there are genuine |
| obstacles to submitting a patch upstream; the reason for that should be |
| included in the patch. |
| |
| ``Submitted [where]`` |
| Submitted to upstream, waiting for approval. Optionally include where |
| it was submitted, such as the author, mailing list, etc. |
| |
| ``Backport [version]`` |
| Accepted upstream and included in the next release, or backported from newer |
| upstream version, because we are at a fixed version. |
| Include upstream version info (e.g. commit ID or next expected version). |
| |
| ``Denied`` |
| Not accepted by upstream, include reason in patch. |
| |
| ``Inactive-Upstream [lastcommit: when (and/or) lastrelease: when]`` |
| The upstream is no longer available. This typically means a defunct project |
| where no activity has happened for a long time --- measured in years. To make |
| that judgement, it is recommended to look at not only when the last release |
| happened, but also when the last commit happened, and whether newly made bug |
| reports and merge requests since that time receive no reaction. It is also |
| recommended to add to the patch description any relevant links where the |
| inactivity can be clearly seen. |
| |
| ``Inappropriate [reason]`` |
| The patch is not appropriate for upstream, include a brief reason on the |
| same line enclosed with ``[]``. In the past, there were several different |
| reasons not to submit patches upstream, but we have to consider that every |
| non-upstreamed patch means a maintainance burden for recipe maintainers. |
| Currently, the only reasons to mark patches as inappropriate for upstream |
| submission are: |
| |
| - ``oe specific``: the issue is specific to how OpenEmbedded performs builds |
| or sets things up at runtime, and can be resolved only with a patch that |
| is not however relevant or appropriate for general upstream submission. |
| - ``upstream ticket <link>``: the issue is not specific to Open-Embedded |
| and should be fixed upstream, but the patch in its current form is not |
| suitable for merging upstream, and the author lacks sufficient expertise |
| to develop a proper patch. Instead the issue is handled via a bug report |
| (include link). |
| |
| Of course, if another person later takes care of submitting this patch upstream, |
| the status should be changed to ``Submitted [where]``, and an additional |
| ``Signed-off-by:`` line should be added to the patch by the person claiming |
| responsibility for upstreaming. |
| |
| Examples |
| -------- |
| |
| Here's an example of a patch that has been submitted upstream:: |
| |
| rpm: Adjusted the foo setting in bar |
| |
| [RPM Ticket #65] -- http://rpm5.org/cvs/tktview?tn=65,5 |
| |
| The foo setting in bar was decreased from X to X-50% in order to |
| ensure we don't exhaust all system memory with foobar threads. |
| |
| Upstream-Status: Submitted [rpm5-devel@rpm5.org] |
| |
| Signed-off-by: Joe Developer <joe.developer@example.com> |
| |
| A future update can change the value to ``Backport`` or ``Denied`` as |
| appropriate. |
| |
| Another example of a patch that is specific to OpenEmbedded:: |
| |
| Do not treat warnings as errors |
| |
| There are additional warnings found with musl which are |
| treated as errors and fails the build, we have more combinations |
| than upstream supports to handle. |
| |
| Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [oe specific] |
| |
| Here's a patch that has been backported from an upstream commit:: |
| |
| include missing sys/file.h for LOCK_EX |
| |
| Upstream-Status: Backport [https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/ac8db36cbc26694ee94beecc8dca208ec4b5fd45] |
| |
| CVE patches |
| =========== |
| |
| In order to have a better control of vulnerabilities, patches that fix CVEs must |
| contain a ``CVE:`` tag. This tag list all CVEs fixed by the patch. If more than |
| one CVE is fixed, separate them using spaces. |
| |
| CVE Examples |
| ------------ |
| |
| This should be the header of patch that fixes :cve:`2015-8370` in GRUB2:: |
| |
| grub2: Fix CVE-2015-8370 |
| |
| [No upstream tracking] -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1286966 |
| |
| Back to 28; Grub2 Authentication |
| |
| Two functions suffer from integer underflow fault; the grub_username_get() and grub_password_get()located in |
| grub-core/normal/auth.c and lib/crypto.c respectively. This can be exploited to obtain a Grub rescue shell. |
| |
| Upstream-Status: Backport [http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/grub.git/commit/?id=451d80e52d851432e109771bb8febafca7a5f1f2] |
| CVE: CVE-2015-8370 |
| Signed-off-by: Joe Developer <joe.developer@example.com> |