From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RYHEl-00051s-GS for bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 07 Dec 2011 14:08:39 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pB7D1nVE013145; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:01:49 GMT Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 11271-10; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:01:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pB7D1cMa013139 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:01:39 GMT Message-ID: <1323262909.30601.13.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Robert Yang Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 13:01:49 +0000 In-Reply-To: <4EDC3A0B.4060301@windriver.com> References: <4EDC3A0B.4060301@windriver.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.1- Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org, "Rifenbark, Scott M" Subject: Re: How bitbake works(Draft) X-BeenThere: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 13:08:39 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Robert, On Mon, 2011-12-05 at 11:27 +0800, Robert Yang wrote: > Here is a doc about how bitbake works, it may help the bitbake > newbie to understand how bitbake works, I'm very glad to add it > to the public bitbake repository as documentation if it is useful. > please feel free to give you comments. I like this and I do think we need to improve the bitbake documentation. We do need to ensure there is some consistent style and format for the documents though so anything going into the repository really needs to be added to the existing manual. I'm also a little concerned that in its current form (listing arguments to functions), this documentation would be high maintenance. If we could separate it from the code implementation details a little bit, I think it would make it less likely to bitrot quite as quickly. Cheers, Richard