All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
To: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Cc: OpenEmbedded Devel List
	<openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org>,
	Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>,
	Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCH] core-image.bbclass: Reformat definition of CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 04:41:33 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.11.1407120436510.28008@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMKF1spgCphqN7PVskjP_bHd2CfsBRi52y=KJ2fWyjwQxw0cYw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 11 Jul 2014, Khem Raj wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Otavio Salvador
> <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > +OE-Core
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 7:23 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> Reformat the assignment to CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL to be more
> >> intuitively obvious.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >>   compile and run-time tested, building a core-image-minimal for
> >> qemuarm.
> >>
> >> diff --git a/meta/classes/core-image.bbclass b/meta/classes/core-image.bbclass
> >> index 1b36cba..d2b9d69 100644
> >> --- a/meta/classes/core-image.bbclass
> >> +++ b/meta/classes/core-image.bbclass
> >> @@ -59,13 +59,11 @@ MACHINE_HWCODECS ??= ""
> >>  CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL = '\
> >>      packagegroup-core-boot \
> >>      packagegroup-base-extended \
> >> -    \
> >> -    ${CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL} \
> >>      '
> >>
> >>  CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL ?= ""
> >>
> >> -IMAGE_INSTALL ?= "${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL}"
> >> +IMAGE_INSTALL ?= "${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL} ${CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL}"
> >
> > For me, more intuitively would be:
> >
> > CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL ?= ...
>
> weak assignment here would mean overridable base install which is
> not the intention. we want a working base image when inheriting
> core-image

  except that that argument doesn't really hold water given how one
can inherit core-image, then (as i pointed out) immediately wipe out
that supposedly inviolable definition of CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL by
simply reassigning to IMAGE_INSTALL.

  i *like* the idea of a weak assignment to CORE_IMAGE_BASE INSTALL.
it's effectively what core-image-minimal is doing anyway, it just
allows you to do it in a way that's not grotesquely ugly.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
To: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Cc: OpenEmbedded Devel List
	<openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org>,
	Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>,
	Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] core-image.bbclass: Reformat definition of CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 04:41:33 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.11.1407120436510.28008@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMKF1spgCphqN7PVskjP_bHd2CfsBRi52y=KJ2fWyjwQxw0cYw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 11 Jul 2014, Khem Raj wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Otavio Salvador
> <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > +OE-Core
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 7:23 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> Reformat the assignment to CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL to be more
> >> intuitively obvious.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >>   compile and run-time tested, building a core-image-minimal for
> >> qemuarm.
> >>
> >> diff --git a/meta/classes/core-image.bbclass b/meta/classes/core-image.bbclass
> >> index 1b36cba..d2b9d69 100644
> >> --- a/meta/classes/core-image.bbclass
> >> +++ b/meta/classes/core-image.bbclass
> >> @@ -59,13 +59,11 @@ MACHINE_HWCODECS ??= ""
> >>  CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL = '\
> >>      packagegroup-core-boot \
> >>      packagegroup-base-extended \
> >> -    \
> >> -    ${CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL} \
> >>      '
> >>
> >>  CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL ?= ""
> >>
> >> -IMAGE_INSTALL ?= "${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL}"
> >> +IMAGE_INSTALL ?= "${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL} ${CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL}"
> >
> > For me, more intuitively would be:
> >
> > CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL ?= ...
>
> weak assignment here would mean overridable base install which is
> not the intention. we want a working base image when inheriting
> core-image

  except that that argument doesn't really hold water given how one
can inherit core-image, then (as i pointed out) immediately wipe out
that supposedly inviolable definition of CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL by
simply reassigning to IMAGE_INSTALL.

  i *like* the idea of a weak assignment to CORE_IMAGE_BASE INSTALL.
it's effectively what core-image-minimal is doing anyway, it just
allows you to do it in a way that's not grotesquely ugly.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================


  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-12  8:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-11 22:23 [PATCH] core-image.bbclass: Reformat definition of CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL Robert P. J. Day
2014-07-11 23:41 ` [oe] " Otavio Salvador
2014-07-11 23:41   ` Otavio Salvador
2014-07-12  5:02   ` [oe] " Khem Raj
2014-07-12  5:02     ` [OE-core] " Khem Raj
2014-07-12  8:41     ` Robert P. J. Day [this message]
2014-07-12  8:41       ` Robert P. J. Day
2014-07-16 20:19       ` [oe] " Khem Raj
2014-07-16 20:19         ` [OE-core] " Khem Raj

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.11.1407120436510.28008@localhost \
    --to=rpjday@crashcourse.ca \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=otavio@ossystems.com.br \
    --cc=raj.khem@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.