Re: [pull-sys940x 2/4] ranpwd: Add ranpwd recipe

[Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>]

On 02/06/2012 11:06 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 03:59:36PM -0800, Joshua Lock wrote:
>> On 06/02/12 08:17, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>>> On Thursday 02 February 2012 13:11:19 Joshua Lock wrote:
>>>> Apologies. I'm wrong here. It was PRIORITY which we agreed to drop.
>>>
>>> It's worth noting however, at the same time PRIORITY removal was discussed it
>>> was acknowledged that SECTION was questionable. Logical grouping of
>>> recipes/packages is a useful thing but coming up with groupings that are
>>> meaningful in all contexts is hard :(
>>
>> Glad to know my recollection isn't wildly off the mark.
>>
>> I noticed that there are similar, yet different, SECTION values being 
>> used. If we opt to keep SECTION I wonder if we should try and 
>> standardise/sanitise it?
> 
> If there is standardised SECTION variable why not use
> recipes-${SECTION}/foo_1.0.bb as we already have couple of recipe-*
> directories and it's sometimes hard to decide to which directory
> something belongs.
> 
> Or other way around, standartise recipes-* directories and let bitbake
> decide SECTION from it (like it does for PV and PN).

Brilliant.

--
Darren

> 
> Cheers,
> 
>>
>> Debian's sections seem like reasonable inspiration? 
>> http://packages.debian.org/stable/
>>
>> I think SECTION is useful for tools like Hob and Narcissus, so I'm in 
>> favour of keeping them.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Joshua
>> -- 
>> Joshua Lock
>>          Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
>>          Intel Open Source Technology Centre
>> _______________________________________________
>> yocto mailing list
>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel