Re: proper use of CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?

[Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>]

On Tuesday 19 June 2012 13:05:35 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>   followup to earlier post, it's easy enough to see the point of this
> code from core-image.bbclass:
> 
> ... snip ...
> 
> CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL = '\
>     task-core-boot \
>     task-base-extended \
>     \
>     ${CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL} \
>     '
> 
> CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL ?= ""
> 
> IMAGE_INSTALL ?= "${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL}"
> 
> ... snip ...
> 
>   but i can see this snippet from
> meta/recipes-graphics/images/core-image-gtk-directfb.bb:
> 
> ... snip ...
> 
> inherit core-image
> 
> IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
>         ${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL} \
>         task-core-basic \
>         task-core-gtk-directfb-base \
> "
> 
> ... snip ...
> 
>   now this would seem to be exactly what the variable
> CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL was invented for, no?  certainly the above
> will work but then what's the point of having
> CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?
> 
>   however, if one used that, it's obvious that one would leave the
> line "inherit core-image" to near the bottom of the .bb file, but
> returning to my earlier question, what is the proper ordering of
> setting CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL and inheriting core-image.  it's
> clear "inherit core-image" would always work *after*, but what about
> before?

I feel like we've gone over this ground quite a lot; but I guess that's 
because our documentation and examples still aren't clear, so fair enough.

There's nothing forcing you into a specific usage here, however we might make 
some recommendations. My recommendation would be to leave 
CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL for use from local.conf - i.e. don't use it in your 
own image recipe; if you want to add things there use IMAGE_INSTALL += or 
IMAGE_INSTALL_append (see other thread).

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre