From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f46.google.com (mail-wm0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D939B78607 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 22:14:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f46.google.com with SMTP id 9so3007261wme.4 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 14:14:05 -0800 (PST) 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=gblqCyUmUzceEocnjBgP9EwkcvUEx+FFrETFy5V0FLs=; b=dzqDfxUq7e5UsxNnMymLujQn8KfUeqeTXb0JnwErI+w9zJfY+MBHGQ2WRz2XmNP4X7 p6wDhgcA3LBgDAEpeJoR76i+OxsGIxn3c6d4ZY3GcujhfBzsnDdyHrw1FDnVpYIROrXN qvYutB0X2Twnnrtu3XiIIhXmTuk+WqWKMuqvpNbPmjggAmmGUg9BHY60qQqh7sjqcJYn khOo3xgwL3GXuq738rrDg9SXhc6jAgmqAglZjb8fMR1TcIChuRWg2ASrVYoI9tUe3tM6 AeJlh4NBPJudD1bszqJueBYXfdq67cwm7zSZu+IRQ4AklEH3XIJOQTQrqPcH79MWdgYD YbmQ== 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=gblqCyUmUzceEocnjBgP9EwkcvUEx+FFrETFy5V0FLs=; b=kFF7fy9QzNUo2bSiOMSx/BoLKvUdIhPADs0nJTX8eZSw4wcx9vfvIUAJc6gmwD9uUG 5mhn0DBx8lcNjQMPVkrpoIhNVViqE16VFb8uePK8554XfMJ2gq33qY+EGJv3rBxMW5P4 o7ZlaoQsYt2X7I41KeZXq7Fet0Sw0uwP9Jp3gm1aLa4yD0Fs0gaioP/s5VTr4R7+MciT fPDzRZHiVDnPtaaHtw5XCPbGi+oBlWqqfWKTjDG5uuZbbmFYQTDKt5RIDF4W856NcR2k wfu+eKlZKjtBrhkQsRHFcg6cyW1ofE0ynAMIyXfUyqG11J9WWuIgji40i1TihgDCfxYS Im4Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX7758gL41LghGd2qbhgXrFLE11lakdS1Ja88mXPoPrVrffthbLc djveVu5bw70dXuaVDkjnkr0V X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbmbF/ZHn8jPeBFMfK80mcs58/YG3iX55EhAi/hR4M0LUdTMaAyH4GuL5e+aBs29/gx0Hc3TA== X-Received: by 10.28.4.146 with SMTP id 140mr2414061wme.38.1510870444521; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 14:14:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p54BD58EA.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [84.189.88.234]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d71sm1182372wma.7.2017.11.16.14.14.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Nov 2017 14:14:03 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1510870442.5979.36.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Mark Asselstine Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 23:14:02 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1822334.tYZlPLg4XR@yow-masselst-lx1> References: <1510845589-10848-1-git-send-email-mark.asselstine@windriver.com> <1510856886.5979.34.camel@intel.com> <1822334.tYZlPLg4XR@yow-masselst-lx1> Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6-1+deb9u1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [meta-webserver][PATCH] meta-webserver: apache2 allow SYSTEMD_AUTO_ENABLE to be overwritten X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 22:14:04 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 15:00 -0500, Mark Asselstine wrote: > On Thursday, November 16, 2017 7:28:06 PM EST Patrick Ohly wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 10:19 -0500, Mark Asselstine wrote: > > > The current assignment does not allow a bbappend to be used to > > > overwrite the SYSTEMD_AUTO_ENABLE value in order to have apache2 > > > auto > > > start. > > > > Why does SYSTEMD_AUTO_ENABLE_${PN} = "enable" in a apache2_*.bb not > > work? It works fine for me with wpa-supplicant: > > Sorry. You are correct the bbappend will overwrite it, but this > requires a bbappend. If this used "?=" you could achieve this in a > local.conf or similar.  SYSTEMD_AUTO_ENABLE_pn-wpa-supplicant = "enable" in local.conf also overrides the = assignment in the .bb file. > In general if there is a possibility for a value to be desireable to > overwrite using "?=" makes sense. Thoughts? I thought the same for a while, but since then I've come around to the interpretation that for recipe-specific variables, using =? is mostly just a cosmetic thing. I can't think of a good example where it really matters in practice. It's different for global variables which might get set prior to parsing a recipe (distro config, local.conf). There it makes sense to not overwrite a potentially existing value. -- 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.