[Toaster] [PATCH 1/1] toaster: fix banner after customimage package add

[Lerner, Dave]

Thanks, see below

On Monday, February 22, 2016 10:57 AM, Michael Wood wrote:
> On 19/02/16 22:23, Dave Lerner wrote:
> > Correct formatting of the banner message after adding a package to a
> > custom image.  Also, correct the tracking of dependent packages for the
> > added package, adding them to the set of packages appended to the
> > base image rather than the set originally included the base image.
> >
> > [YOCTO #9101]
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Lerner <dave.lerner at windriver.com>
> > ---
> >   bitbake/lib/toaster/toastergui/static/js/customrecipe.js | 7 +++++--
> >   bitbake/lib/toaster/toastergui/views.py                  | 2 +-
> >   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/bitbake/lib/toaster/toastergui/static/js/customrecipe.js
> b/bitbake/lib/toaster/toastergui/static/js/customrecipe.js
> > index a1fe486..3c57899 100644
> > --- a/bitbake/lib/toaster/toastergui/static/js/customrecipe.js
> > +++ b/bitbake/lib/toaster/toastergui/static/js/customrecipe.js
> > @@ -127,7 +127,8 @@ function customRecipePageInit(ctx) {
> >         if (targetPkg.hasOwnProperty('depsAdded') &&
> >           targetPkg.depsAdded.length > 0) {
> >
> > -        msg += "added " + (targetPkg.depsAdded.length + 1);
> > +        msg += "added ";
> > +        msg += "<strong>" + (targetPkg.depsAdded.length + 1) + "</strong>";
> >           msg += " packages to " + ctx.recipe.name + ": ";
> >           msg += "<strong>" + targetPkg.name + "</strong> and its dependencies";
> >
> > @@ -150,7 +151,9 @@ function customRecipePageInit(ctx) {
> >             (targetPkg.depsAdded.length + 1) + " packages added");
> >
> >         } else {
> > -        msg += ' <strong>' + targetPkg.name + '<strong>';
> > +        msg += "added <strong>1</strong>";
> > +        msg += " package to " + ctx.recipe.name + ": ";
> > +        msg += "<strong>" + targetPkg.name + "</strong>";
> >           inlineNotify.text("1 package added");
> >         }
> 
> Belen tested the UI part and code looks fine to me.
> >
> > diff --git a/bitbake/lib/toaster/toastergui/views.py
> b/bitbake/lib/toaster/toastergui/views.py
> > index dfa256e..83ba536 100755
> > --- a/bitbake/lib/toaster/toastergui/views.py
> > +++ b/bitbake/lib/toaster/toastergui/views.py
> > @@ -2644,7 +2644,7 @@ if True:
> >                           cust_package = CustomImagePackage.objects.get(
> >                                              name=dep.depends_on.name)
> >
> > -                        recipe.includes_set.add(cust_package)
> > +                        recipe.appends_set.add(cust_package)
> 
> Packages included was the correct place for these to be added. This
> includes_set is a list of all the packages that have *not* been added by
> the user themselves,

I also assumed that includes_set was only those packages not added by the user, but when the user acknowledges adding the dependencies in the modal dialog, then I considered those packages as 'user-added'.  I will remove my change from the patch set, although my proposed patch fixed two previously existing bugs.  There is another way to fix both of the bugs, outlined below:

Existing bugs back in play...
For uninstalled package C1, dependent on P1 (already installed) and P2 (not installed)...
A) user adds C1, acknowledges adding P2, (P1 not shown in modal) both get 'added'
B) user 'removes' C1 and then manually (until bug 9121 fix) removes 'P2' 
C) user adds back C1, and modal dialog again shows 'P2' was added
* Bug 1 *
D) user looks at 'P2' but it appears unadded, showing "Add Package" not "Remove Package"

> they get brought in when bitbake does the package
> level dependency resolution. bitbake is in control of dependency
> resolution, we aren't a package manager so we do a best guess based on
> previous build, this gets corrected automatically after rebuilding the
> recipe.

* Bug 2 *
Not everything gets corrected after a build: after building, recycling toaster, P2 still looks like it wasn't added, showing the "Add Package" button, not the "Remove Package" button, even though it was brought in and built by adding C1 at step (C).

> Thanks,
> Michael

If I revert my original fix, then I can fix this issue by, in addition to adding the dependent packages to the includes set, removing those entries from the excludes set. 

Michael, assuming I revert my original views.py fix, do you want me to write up a new defect for the two bugs or do you want me to roll in the excludes fix into the current patch set?

Thanks,
Dave