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 1TwBXD-0003wv-1t for bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 13:59:16 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r0IChYEU008881; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:43:34 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 05510-03; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:43:30 +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 r0IChSup008874 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:43:29 GMT Message-ID: <1358513008.27799.20.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Andrew Stubbs Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:43:28 +0000 In-Reply-To: <50F421E6.4060400@codesourcery.com> References: <50F421E6.4060400@codesourcery.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix bundled base.bbclass file 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: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:59:16 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 15:19 +0000, Andrew Stubbs wrote: > The base.bbclass file that is included with the bitbake sources does not > appear to work properly. Specifically, none of the output appears on screen. > > A quick look at the poky equivalent shows that they use a different > means to print the data. Presumably something got updated somewhere, and > the example base class is merely out of date. > > The attached patch fixes the do_listtasks and do_showdata code such that > it works as I would expect. I merged that, thanks. > I had expected that the base_do_build function would run if my .bb file > did not define do_build, but it does not appear to, and it's not obvious > to me how, when, or why it is supposed to work. Your expectation is correct, I'm not sure why that wouldn't happen. The EXPORT_FUNCTIONS do_build should mean do_build gets mapped to base_do_build. Cheers, Richard