All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1" or "true"?
@ 2013-11-02 10:27 Robert P. J. Day
  2013-11-03 20:49 ` Khem Raj
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2013-11-02 10:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Yocto discussion list


  (i can see it's going to be that kind of weekend.) ref manual reads:

     BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1"

but some layers define:

meta-linaro/meta-aarch64/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "true"
meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "true"
meta-linaro/meta-linaro/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "true"
poky-extras/meta-kernel-dev/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY ?= "true"

so general question(s) -- is it understood that "1" and "true" are
equivalent? should there be a standard? should the ref manual be
enhanced, or should the above layers clean themselves up?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1" or "true"?
  2013-11-02 10:27 BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1" or "true"? Robert P. J. Day
@ 2013-11-03 20:49 ` Khem Raj
  2013-11-04 18:47   ` Paul Eggleton
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Khem Raj @ 2013-11-03 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Robert P. J. Day; +Cc: Yocto discussion list

On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>
>   (i can see it's going to be that kind of weekend.) ref manual reads:
>
>      BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1"
>
> but some layers define:
>
> meta-linaro/meta-aarch64/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "true"
> meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "true"
> meta-linaro/meta-linaro/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "true"
> poky-extras/meta-kernel-dev/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY ?= "true"
>
> so general question(s) -- is it understood that "1" and "true" are
> equivalent? should there be a standard? should the ref manual be
> enhanced, or should the above layers clean themselves up?

They are all correct. Accepted values are

"1", "yes", "true"

>
> rday
>
> --
>
> ========================================================================
> Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
>                         http://crashcourse.ca
>
> Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
> LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
> ========================================================================
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1" or "true"?
  2013-11-03 20:49 ` Khem Raj
@ 2013-11-04 18:47   ` Paul Eggleton
  2013-11-04 18:54     ` Robert P. J. Day
  2013-11-04 19:29     ` Khem Raj
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Eggleton @ 2013-11-04 18:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Khem Raj, Robert P. J. Day; +Cc: yocto

On Sunday 03 November 2013 12:49:16 Khem Raj wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> 
wrote:
> >   (i can see it's going to be that kind of weekend.) ref manual reads:
> >      BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1"
> > 
> > but some layers define:
> > 
> > meta-linaro/meta-aarch64/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY =
> > "true"
> > meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARN
> > ONLY = "true"
> > meta-linaro/meta-linaro/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY =
> > "true"
> > poky-extras/meta-kernel-dev/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY
> > ?= "true"
> > 
> > so general question(s) -- is it understood that "1" and "true" are
> > equivalent? should there be a standard? should the ref manual be
> > enhanced, or should the above layers clean themselves up?
> 
> They are all correct. Accepted values are
> 
> "1", "yes", "true"

Note - for this variable only. For consistency with other "boolean" type 
variables I'd suggest sticking to "1".

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1" or "true"?
  2013-11-04 18:47   ` Paul Eggleton
@ 2013-11-04 18:54     ` Robert P. J. Day
  2013-11-04 19:02       ` Paul Eggleton
  2013-11-04 19:29     ` Khem Raj
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2013-11-04 18:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggleton; +Cc: yocto

On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, Paul Eggleton wrote:

> On Sunday 03 November 2013 12:49:16 Khem Raj wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
> wrote:
> > >   (i can see it's going to be that kind of weekend.) ref manual reads:
> > >      BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1"
> > >
> > > but some layers define:
> > >
> > > meta-linaro/meta-aarch64/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY =
> > > "true"
> > > meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARN
> > > ONLY = "true"
> > > meta-linaro/meta-linaro/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY =
> > > "true"
> > > poky-extras/meta-kernel-dev/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY
> > > ?= "true"
> > >
> > > so general question(s) -- is it understood that "1" and "true" are
> > > equivalent? should there be a standard? should the ref manual be
> > > enhanced, or should the above layers clean themselves up?
> >
> > They are all correct. Accepted values are
> >
> > "1", "yes", "true"
>
> Note - for this variable only. For consistency with other "boolean" type
> variables I'd suggest sticking to "1".

  wait ... so those three synonyms are equivalent for only that one
variable? ewwwwwwwwww ...

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1" or "true"?
  2013-11-04 18:54     ` Robert P. J. Day
@ 2013-11-04 19:02       ` Paul Eggleton
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Eggleton @ 2013-11-04 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Robert P. J. Day; +Cc: yocto

On Monday 04 November 2013 13:54:24 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > On Sunday 03 November 2013 12:49:16 Khem Raj wrote:
> > > On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
> > 
> > wrote:
> > > >   (i can see it's going to be that kind of weekend.) ref manual reads:
> > > >      BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1"
> > > > 
> > > > but some layers define:
> > > > 
> > > > meta-linaro/meta-aarch64/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY =
> > > > "true"
> > > > meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_W
> > > > ARN
> > > > ONLY = "true"
> > > > meta-linaro/meta-linaro/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY =
> > > > "true"
> > > > poky-extras/meta-kernel-dev/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONL
> > > > Y
> > > > ?= "true"
> > > > 
> > > > so general question(s) -- is it understood that "1" and "true" are
> > > > equivalent? should there be a standard? should the ref manual be
> > > > enhanced, or should the above layers clean themselves up?
> > > 
> > > They are all correct. Accepted values are
> > > 
> > > "1", "yes", "true"
> > 
> > Note - for this variable only. For consistency with other "boolean" type
> > variables I'd suggest sticking to "1".
> 
>   wait ... so those three synonyms are equivalent for only that one
> variable? ewwwwwwwwww ...

That's the way it has been coded in this instance I'm afraid, yes.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1" or "true"?
  2013-11-04 18:47   ` Paul Eggleton
  2013-11-04 18:54     ` Robert P. J. Day
@ 2013-11-04 19:29     ` Khem Raj
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Khem Raj @ 2013-11-04 19:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggleton; +Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org discussion


On Nov 4, 2013, at 10:47 AM, Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On Sunday 03 November 2013 12:49:16 Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> 
> wrote:
>>>  (i can see it's going to be that kind of weekend.) ref manual reads:
>>>     BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1"
>>> 
>>> but some layers define:
>>> 
>>> meta-linaro/meta-aarch64/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY =
>>> "true"
>>> meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARN
>>> ONLY = "true"
>>> meta-linaro/meta-linaro/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY =
>>> "true"
>>> poky-extras/meta-kernel-dev/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY
>>> ?= "true"
>>> 
>>> so general question(s) -- is it understood that "1" and "true" are
>>> equivalent? should there be a standard? should the ref manual be
>>> enhanced, or should the above layers clean themselves up?
>> 
>> They are all correct. Accepted values are
>> 
>> "1", "yes", "true"
> 
> Note - for this variable only. For consistency with other "boolean" type 
> variables I'd suggest sticking to "1”.

may be it should be deprecated slowly for other values.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2013-11-04 19:29 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-11-02 10:27 BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY = "1" or "true"? Robert P. J. Day
2013-11-03 20:49 ` Khem Raj
2013-11-04 18:47   ` Paul Eggleton
2013-11-04 18:54     ` Robert P. J. Day
2013-11-04 19:02       ` Paul Eggleton
2013-11-04 19:29     ` Khem Raj

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.