From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SznJR-00075D-NM for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 13:23:29 +0200 Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Aug 2012 04:11:38 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,745,1336374000"; d="scan'208";a="196634598" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.121.78]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Aug 2012 04:11:38 -0700 From: Paul Eggleton To: Alex J Lennon Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 12:11:37 +0100 Message-ID: <1660331.qcC0NDgy9m@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.9 (Linux/3.2.0-27-generic-pae; KDE/4.9.0; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: <1717286.mDh904HIi2@helios> References: <5024E843.2050709@dynamicdevices.co.uk> <1717286.mDh904HIi2@helios> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: Best practise using .bbappend X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 11:23:29 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Friday 10 August 2012 12:06:28 Paul Eggleton wrote: > > Should I be setting a PREFERRED_VERSION_bar somewhere, say in the conf > > for my new layer, on any recipe that I add a .bbppends to, or what's best > > practise for dealing with this? > > Setting a PREFERRED_VERSION_ for each bbappended recipe is a reasonable > approach assuming this is a layer intended to apply some policy (i.e. a > distro layer). > > In practice this is unlikely to come up too often - in OE-Core we usually > delete the old recipe when upgrading to a new version, and thus if you have > a bbappend for the old version in your layer you will get an error after > parsing indicating the bbappend had no matching recipe. I forgot to mention, "bitbake-layers show-appends" will warn if there is a bbappend for one version of a particular PN but none for the current preferred version; thus it can be used to catch where this situation has occurred, the old recipe was not deleted and no PREFERRED_VERSION_ has been set. In general bitbake-layers is quite a useful utility for querying layer configuration and interaction. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre