Re: any point in a single machine recipe using a machine-specific file?

[Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3532 bytes --]

On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:23:01AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013, Tomas Frydrych wrote:
> 
> > On 19/04/13 15:02, Burton, Ross wrote:
> > > On 19 April 2013 14:49, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > >>   but in the case of the rpi, is there any value in putting the
> > >> files under a machine-named subdirectory? of course it won't
> > >> hurt, but is there any point to it?
> > >
> > > You could argue the clarity that it will bring if another machine
> > > is added to the BSP - the maintainer will be forced to decide if
> > > it's common across all machines that the BSP will service, or
> > > truly is specific to a particular machine.
> >
> > No, no, no, this has nothing to do with clarity, it's the only way
> > in which it can be done without breaking other machines. As Martin
> > said, multiple BSP layers often are included at the same time, and
> > if a config file pulled in by a BSP bbappend is not made machine
> > specific (which is what the machine specific directory means), it
> > will be installed for any machine that does not come with a higher
> > priority bbappend that also overrides this file.
> 
>   ok, now we're getting somewhere -- so it would be *strongly*
> *encouraged* to make all of these bbappend files machine-specific?
> that is, if you want to avoid potential confusion down the road. i'm
> still a bit queasy on the idea that you'd include so many layers that
> this might be an issue but ... whatever. i mean, if i wasn't
> specifically building for an rpi, i can't imagine why i'd include the
> meta-rpi layer.

This is my typical layer list

meta-jama         = "master:33e48de8cf588c9df80025339d7883e25a3e3fb8"
meta-shr
meta-aurora
meta-fso
meta-android      = "webOS-ports/master:0fe4b5559335d24764260d47d3f60d68de502a61"
meta-oe
meta-efl
meta-gnome
meta-gpe
meta-multimedia
meta-networking
meta-initramfs
meta-systemd      = "jansa/test:a5c0447694ddacab285f192e1d8e425f6899d6e3"
meta-osmocombb
meta-nokia
meta-htc
meta-palm
meta-openmoko
meta-samsung      = "webOS-ports/master:0fe4b5559335d24764260d47d3f60d68de502a61"
meta-browser      = "jansa/test:359cdae903c3772796b4658dd3129742d9a76d05"
meta-handheld     = "jansa/spitz:68177884e36e08cb76f11048bdf8ee3435b75ea3"
meta              = "jansa/test:2ac95cf4581c963ae49bc6f7af430a05228c34bc"

so I have at least 6 different BSPs with += 10 MACHINEs all these BSPs are 
playing nice together and that's how it should be..

IIRC Angstorm includes even more BSPs..

> 
> > As an additional point, the 'interfaces' file should not be included
> > in a netbase bbappend, it's not part of the netbase base package ...
> > I opened a bug against meta-yocto-bsp for this, but seems this is
> > more wide spread.
> 
>   huh, you're right, i'd never noticed that.
> 
> rday
> 
> -- 
> 
> ========================================================================
> Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
>                         http://crashcourse.ca
> 
> Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
> LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
> ========================================================================
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]