From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-out.m-online.net (mail-out.m-online.net [212.18.0.10]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0620260600 for ; Sun, 19 Oct 2014 21:13:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.nefkom.net (unknown [192.168.8.184]) by mail-out.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3jLYjy4BKfz3hjMJ; Sun, 19 Oct 2014 23:13:42 +0200 (CEST) X-Auth-Info: o3PiohUsr4kribjeH9nm02uFFbHeTH9GprUg08v0aYE= Received: from chi.localnet (unknown [195.140.253.167]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-auth.mnet-online.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3jLYjy0828zvdWR; Sun, 19 Oct 2014 23:13:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Marek Vasut To: Otavio Salvador Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 23:13:41 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.13-trunk-amd64; KDE/4.13.1; x86_64; ; ) References: <1413746147-7120-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> <1413746147-7120-2-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201410192313.41430.marex@denx.de> Cc: Paul Eggleton , Koen Kooi , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] kernel: Clean up KERNEL_IMAGETYPE_FOR_MAKE X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 21:13:48 -0000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sunday, October 19, 2014 at 09:25:36 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > Remove the lambda function setting KERNEL_IMAGETYPE_FOR_MAKE and instead > > set it in the anonymous python function. This also allows us to handle > > image types which are not supported directly by kernel, but require some > > other kernel target to be built. This is the case for example with the > > fitImage, which is the uImage successor. > > > > There is no functional change. > > This is not really what the code shows; your regexp is more permissive > than the previous lambda. Do you happen to have a suggestion how to improve the patch please ? I'm not really a python guru so any help is welcome ... Best regards, Marek Vasut