From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.windriver.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8221471368; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 15:03:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.9/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s84F3SxC006769 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 4 Sep 2014 08:03:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.162.181] (128.224.162.181) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 08:03:28 -0700 Message-ID: <54087F3F.2040103@windriver.com> Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 23:03:27 +0800 From: Robert Yang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: , OE-core References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [oe] Style issue for recipes X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:03:32 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 09/04/2014 10:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote: > Hi, > > Quick question of style for the community to bikeshed on: in the > general case should recipes be split into foo_1.2.bb and foo.inc, or > should they only split to bb/inc if there are multiple versions and > generally there should just be foo_1.2.bb. I think that put the constants in .inc is helpful for upgrading, for example, the SUMMARY, DESCRIPTION, HOMEPAGE, SECTION, inherit and so on, they are unlikely to change when upgrade. // Robert > > Specifically I'm looking at the libunwind patch for oe-core (moving > from meta-oe) which adds libunwind_1.1.bb and libunwind.inc. > Personally I feel that splitting them up complicates packaging and > should only be done if there's actually multiple versions being used. > > Ross > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.windriver.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8221471368; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 15:03:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.9/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s84F3SxC006769 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 4 Sep 2014 08:03:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.162.181] (128.224.162.181) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 08:03:28 -0700 Message-ID: <54087F3F.2040103@windriver.com> Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 23:03:27 +0800 From: Robert Yang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: , OE-core References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Style issue for recipes X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:03:32 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 09/04/2014 10:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote: > Hi, > > Quick question of style for the community to bikeshed on: in the > general case should recipes be split into foo_1.2.bb and foo.inc, or > should they only split to bb/inc if there are multiple versions and > generally there should just be foo_1.2.bb. I think that put the constants in .inc is helpful for upgrading, for example, the SUMMARY, DESCRIPTION, HOMEPAGE, SECTION, inherit and so on, they are unlikely to change when upgrade. // Robert > > Specifically I'm looking at the libunwind patch for oe-core (moving > from meta-oe) which adds libunwind_1.1.bb and libunwind.inc. > Personally I feel that splitting them up complicates packaging and > should only be done if there's actually multiple versions being used. > > Ross >