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 1SLEm0-0007wb-R4 for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 20 Apr 2012 16:25:21 +0200 Received: by mail.chez-thomas.org (Postfix, from userid 1998) id 3D446F81249; Fri, 20 Apr 2012 08:15:52 -0600 (MDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) 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 Received: from hermes.chez-thomas.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.chez-thomas.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51A84F811F4; Fri, 20 Apr 2012 08:15:50 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <4F916F96.8050901@mlbassoc.com> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 08:15:50 -0600 From: Gary Thomas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <4F916294.6090706@mlbassoc.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: COMPATIBLE_MACHINE 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, 20 Apr 2012 14:25:21 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2012-04-20 08:04, Chris Larson wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Gary Thomas wrote: >> I'm writing a .bbappend for a recipe which contains a COMPATIBLE_MACHINE >> pattern like this: >> COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(machine1|machine2|machine3)" >> >> Is there a way my .bbappend file can add to this pattern? I don't want >> to disturb what's there, just add my machine as well. > > It's just a standard regular expression. > > COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(machine1|machine2|machine3)" > COMPATIBLE_MACHINE .= "|machine4" > > Will result in a value of "(machine1|machine2|machine3)|machine4", > which is still a perfectly valid pattern, as far as I can tell. Yes, this does seem to work. Any clues why most uses of COMPATIBLE_MACHINE use the regex "(x|y|z)" instead of just "x|y|z"? Aren't they the same? -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates | Embedded world ------------------------------------------------------------