On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Alex J Lennon
<ajlennon@dynamicdevices.co.uk> wrote:

On 02/05/2014 14:07, Otavio Salvador wrote:

On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Alex J Lennon
<ajlennon@dynamicdevices.co.uk> wrote:

On 02/05/2014 13:56, Otavio Salvador wrote:

On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:24 AM, Alex J Lennon
<ajlennon@dynamicdevices.co.uk> wrote:
...

So I guess I'm at the point where I'm wondering if a getVar() with a
flag is behaving as you would expect it to,
or how I might go about ensuring either UBOOT_MACHINE or UBOOT_CONFIG
isn't defined?

Thanks in advance for any advice,

I think we have a simple error error. You are mixing a recipe, which
is old and a metadata layer with new concepts.

The u-boot-imx, in 2009.08 recipe, used to set the UBOOT_MACHINE in
the recipe as it was left as a fallback in case user needed it and the
value was different from newer releases.

In your case, the easier is to make a new yourmachine.conf and use the
UBOOT_CONFIG or UBOOT_MACHINE setting there so it will work just fine.

If I have to do that, then I have to do that.

However if I could just undefine one of the two variables defined in the
meta-fsl-arm
layer then I could continue with what I am doing without having to spend
the time
right now to rework the configuration, which is wasted effort for me, as
I will be moving
up to the new version of u-boot in the near future.

Is there no simple way to undefine a variable in a recipe?

You can change the recipe byhand. This is ugly and I wouldn't do it. I
do think you are wasting more time trying to 'workaround' it than
fixing it.

Or indeed, would be not be reasonable to modify the uboot-config.bbclass
such that
it tested for and discarded empty strings in UBOOT_MACHINE / UBOOT_CONFIG
which would seem to be a more complete test and would eliminate the
problem ?

Like: http://privatepaste.com/8046479967

Comment the UBOOT_MACHINE setting in the u-boot-imx recipe and move
on. The log is clear you're not setting the PREFERRED_VERSION
accordingly and you should.

You've lost me. Why am I not setting PREFERRED_VERSION accordingly? I have
two recipes in the checkout and I have configured prefer the older one,
which
seems entirely reasonable.

Your log say's it looks for u-boot-imx 2013.04 and not for 2009.08.

1. PREFERRED_VERSION_u-boot-imx="2009.08"

The test in uboot-config.bbclass causes this to fail/be unavailable to the build, which is why the log says I cannot use 2009.08, instead falling back to the newer version. Removing the two lines checking for the definition of the two variables results in the 2009.08 build completing successfully - but I don't want to leave that little bomb in meta-fsl-arm for colleagues to fall over in future.

I cannot override what meta-fsl-arm is setting because I can't (or don't know how to) undefine one of those two variables in my bbappend, and although I believe I _can_ set it to an empty string as  Paul suggested, I don't believe the the getVar() code in uboot-config.bbclass checks this, although I'm a bit unclear on the semantics of that function call.

I appreciate the help here Otavio, and I was hoping there was a simple non-invasive way to solve the problem by undefining the variable in my layer, as it seemed cleaner.

I don't want to waste any more of your time on this though so if I can't do that then I'll  just  take the hacky route  as an intermediary step, copy out your 2009.08 recipe into my layer and mod it there.

Thanks for the time & feedback though,

Alex