From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f51.google.com (mail-it0-f51.google.com [209.85.214.51]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD7D26079E for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2017 13:06:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f51.google.com with SMTP id r63so19217287itc.1 for ; Fri, 02 Jun 2017 06:06:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6h5367Wbun1lA1QzfItkqTb2OQnLg5ESP06SVhCkrhk=; b=1Zkv2BApFA1d/sD2jYpm3zHa5hWQ/L8NdgW4DHDzeUZibYOFr4zJSrK+rpqvYAOrQt W5nUOfmG1iCNxzZAlwfsEbGioQfWy+DV2EoTXCu1NU7fS6rkYW74Yx/WR53SPAqEYZgZ MAsISSCyiuNGsjFLNZVZGq+qMuijDmF6TrH17+2rwsh3SM19MNEALB3x6FbIXDmTViCF /KsR1+o4qxi00O9umJYfqE/Vm2Ed58x5K0gCDJJ1eNIxkP4fyS/cU4InF6TbBCN4a6aK EdL5jnxOlUlJsfMko0K4DdGil2DIY4qDFuuPaBkB580Mvhy82OjTfByBFLOUnhIUjqKD 7cGg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6h5367Wbun1lA1QzfItkqTb2OQnLg5ESP06SVhCkrhk=; b=jXkIJXLdeTsSHycbD2+alY4xu8LTLW2SvpiRXuVp2ilEzH7y7yRotULvtjlc1H6Lkb eho2Gdftr7r2X1KM+nxHJbVuEAvV1bLNEyAg8ZnSzuijnb2cZTySezI7eZxF+Elxj56s JI1A6lqZYdFChUXoBoMQdX330HZIvwIGbdDWxX6JpRd343ef6RUTUkKnECyaOVDnmWZX s9xAjC+ojrScA8toi8vyzDzF193/AxM2LdK/7ZM1xbLrrhH3007oKyveKOrbBYJS3qn6 5qFyGH4SSVUIAtM26NfpTWtSjIRjSitZzJncUUpEOgDD4x46ehr0e6ZFrW6aJ03MNEcr n6ow== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcC5CIjBf+e3K5GjdnRfIAysKYRnEKMrjmYhsNzwA42xwlmgpcvx UWhVPVEtOEpaalmp X-Received: by 10.36.75.12 with SMTP id q12mr4419462ita.34.1496408794628; Fri, 02 Jun 2017 06:06:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8E6B0.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.230.176]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g12sm10184675iog.60.2017.06.02.06.06.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 02 Jun 2017 06:06:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1496408790.30163.24.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Richard Purdie Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2017 15:06:30 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1496408295.6630.95.camel@linuxfoundation.org> References: <1496408295.6630.95.camel@linuxfoundation.org> Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] cooker.py: allow dangling bbappends if explicitly whitelisted X-BeenThere: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussion that advance bitbake development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2017 13:06:34 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 13:58 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > I'm wondering if there is a hybrid solution if we extend this syntax a > little, e.g.: > > BBFILES_DYNAMIC += "\ > XXXX:${LAYERDIR}/optional-bbappends-XXX/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend > YYYY:${LAYERDIR}/optional-bbappends-YYY/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend > " > > so that the code only applies these BBFILES entries if the layer named > in the first parameter is present? > > This would happen at the end of parsing so ordering becomes a moot > point. The direction you stack BBFILES_DYANMIC in would determin > bbappend application order. > > How does that sound to people? Sounds good to me. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.