From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id DB487E00B31; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:54:54 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low * trust * [208.80.206.84 listed in list.dnswl.org] Received: from smtp684.redcondor.net (smtp684.redcondor.net [208.80.206.84]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9A6BE00B04 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:54:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from astoria.ccjclearline.com ([64.235.106.9]) by smtp684.redcondor.net ({700db0a8-6fb7-4c8b-9b2a-6812225182d8}) via TCP (outbound) with ESMTPS id 20151102175441674_0684 for ; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 17:54:41 +0000 X-RC-FROM: X-RC-RCPT: Received: from [99.240.204.5] (port=33702 helo=crashcourse.ca) by astoria.ccjclearline.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZtJKJ-0004Da-Cj for yocto@yoctoproject.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 12:55:27 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 12:54:33 -0500 (EST) From: "Robert P. J. Day" X-X-Sender: rpjday@localhost To: Yocto discussion list Message-ID: User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LFD 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MAG-OUTBOUND: ccj.redcondor.net@64.235.106.9/32 Subject: should layers define BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY ?= "1"? X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 17:54:54 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII perusing the meta-musl layer, and noticed in layer.conf the line: BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY ?= "1" i thought this was a bit odd since (at least to me) it seems like the sort of thing a *developer* might set in their local.conf to temporarily deal with a dangling .bbappend file -- it never occurred to me that it would be appropriate for a layer to define that value itself as an inherent part of its own ... layerness. a quick grep of the couple dozen layers i have checked out revealed two layers that do that: ./meta-musl/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY ?= "1" ./meta-yocto-kernel-extras/meta-kernel-dev/conf/layer.conf:BB_DANGLINGAPPENDS_WARNONLY ?= "true" i'm curious what others think of this approach. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ========================================================================