Re: [Patch v3] gconf: enable gtk+ 2.0 support to build gconf-sanity-check-2

[Phil Blundell <philb@gnu.org>]

On Mon, 2012-01-16 at 10:19 -0800, Steve Sakoman wrote:
> My tested-by was indeed performed with the meta-oe layer enabled.
> 
> In the future I will make clear what layers were used in my testing.
> 
> I fear that this kind of thing is going to bite us repeatedly :-(

It's never been entirely clear to me why meta-oe needs to override quite
so many bits of oe-core as it does.  I think you're probably right that,
as long as it continues to do so, and people enable meta-oe during
testing, this sort of issue probably is going to continue to occur.

We had some discussion a while back about making the layer priority be a
user-configurable thing, which would enable you to sink meta-oe beneath
oe-core in the priority stack.  This would allow you to use the recipes
which are in meta-oe but not oe-core, without overriding the bits that
do exist in oe-core itself.  I think I lost that argument at the time
but I still feel this would be an improvement.

(Actually, right now what I am doing is just cherry-picking the few
recipes that I need from meta-oe into a local layer and not adding
meta-oe itself to bblayers.conf at all.)

p.