From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from hermes.mlbassoc.com ([64.234.241.98] helo=mail.chez-thomas.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QITfn-0001ux-Tv for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sat, 07 May 2011 00:39:00 +0200 Received: by mail.chez-thomas.org (Postfix, from userid 999) id 6E7DF166030B; Fri, 6 May 2011 16:36:19 -0600 (MDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2-r929478 (2010-03-31) on hermes.chez-thomas.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=4.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.2-r929478 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.chez-thomas.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4F6A1660305; Fri, 6 May 2011 16:36:15 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <4DC477DF.8070702@mlbassoc.com> Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 16:36:15 -0600 From: Gary Thomas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc13 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <1304719828-22697-1-git-send-email-raj.khem@gmail.com> <1304720740.3928.26.camel@mattotaupa> In-Reply-To: <1304720740.3928.26.camel@mattotaupa> Cc: Paul Menzel Subject: Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: conf/layer.conf: Document the operation on BBPATH correctly in the comment 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, 06 May 2011 22:39:00 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 05/06/2011 04:25 PM, Paul Menzel wrote: > Am Freitag, den 06.05.2011, 15:10 -0700 schrieb raj.khem@gmail.com: >> From: Khem Raj >> >> Provide additional commentary that should help a bit more >> >> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj >> --- >> meta-efl/conf/layer.conf | 2 +- >> meta-gnome/conf/layer.conf | 2 +- >> meta-gpe/conf/layer.conf | 2 +- >> meta-oe/conf/layer.conf | 18 +++++++++++++++++- >> 4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/meta-efl/conf/layer.conf b/meta-efl/conf/layer.conf >> index f019337..272fc04 100644 >> --- a/meta-efl/conf/layer.conf >> +++ b/meta-efl/conf/layer.conf >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >> -# We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer o= ur versions >> +# We have a conf and classes directory, append to BBPATH >> BBPATH .=3D ":${LAYERDIR}" >> >> # We have a recipes directory, add to BBFILES >> diff --git a/meta-gnome/conf/layer.conf b/meta-gnome/conf/layer.conf >> index 6e8ff28..902ab8f 100644 >> --- a/meta-gnome/conf/layer.conf >> +++ b/meta-gnome/conf/layer.conf >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >> -# We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer o= ur versions >> +# We have a conf and classes directory, append to BBPATH >> BBPATH .=3D ":${LAYERDIR}" >> >> # We have a recipes directory, add to BBFILES >> diff --git a/meta-gpe/conf/layer.conf b/meta-gpe/conf/layer.conf >> index 006b6af..6c018b1 100644 >> --- a/meta-gpe/conf/layer.conf >> +++ b/meta-gpe/conf/layer.conf >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >> -# We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer o= ur versions >> +# We have a conf and classes directory, append to BBPATH >> BBPATH .=3D ":${LAYERDIR}" >> >> # We have a recipes directory, add to BBFILES >> diff --git a/meta-oe/conf/layer.conf b/meta-oe/conf/layer.conf >> index 36137e9..d5c2a17 100644 >> --- a/meta-oe/conf/layer.conf >> +++ b/meta-oe/conf/layer.conf >> @@ -1,4 +1,14 @@ >> -# We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer o= ur versions >> +# It really depends on order of the layers appearing in BBLAYERS >> +# variable in toplevel bblayers.conf file, where bitbake will search >> +# for .inc files and others where bitbake uses BBPATH since it will >> +# search the directories from first to last as specfied in BBPATH > > spec*i*fied > >> +# Therefore if you want a given layer to be considered high priority >> +# for the .inc and .conf etc. then consider it adding at the beginnin= g > > =E2=80=A6 then consider adding it to the =E2=80=A6 > >> +# of BBPATH. For bblayers bitbake will use BBFILES_PRIORITY to resolv= e >> +# the recipe contention so the order of directories in BBFILES does >> +# not matter > > Full stop at the end? > >> + >> +# We have a conf and classes directory, append to BBPATH >> BBPATH .=3D ":${LAYERDIR}" >> >> # We have a recipes directory, add to BBFILES >> @@ -6,4 +16,10 @@ BBFILES +=3D "${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bb ${LAYERDI= R}/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend" >> >> BBFILE_COLLECTIONS +=3D "openembedded-layer" >> BBFILE_PATTERN_openembedded-layer :=3D "^${LAYERDIR}/" >> + >> +# Define the priority for recipes (.bb files) from this layer > > Add an extra line to make paragraph more clear or start with a capital > letter below? > >> +# this should be noted when you use this layer since it has > > Note sounds strange. Use =C2=BBdefined=C2=AB again? > >> +# to fall into the correct layer priority order that you have decided >> +# for you layering model > > s/you/your/ > >> + >> BBFILE_PRIORITY_openembedded-layer =3D "6" > > Acked-by: Paul Menzel > > But please wait a bit before pushing it. Maybe a native speaker will > read through the new comments. The corrections look fine, but I think that last bit should be worded more like this: # Define the priority for recipes (.bb files) from this layer, # choosing carefully how this layer interacts with all of the # other layers. n.b. I'm not convinced of the worth of layer priorities; I don't see what they gain and to me they only cause confusion... --=20 ------------------------------------------------------------ Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates | Embedded world ------------------------------------------------------------