From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1M3Peg-0005u7-Ut for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Mon, 11 May 2009 09:10:52 +0200 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1M3PYP-0005D1-Dp for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Mon, 11 May 2009 07:04:01 +0000 Received: from s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl ([85.145.118.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 11 May 2009 07:04:01 +0000 Received: from k.kooi by s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 11 May 2009 07:04:01 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 09:03:46 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20090427141943.GG18788@smtp.west.cox.net> <20090429161224.GB18788@smtp.west.cox.net> <49FCA524.10102@dls.net> <20090503165318.GA7973@smtp.west.cox.net> <20090510194704.GZ7973@smtp.west.cox.net> <20090510215154.GA7973@smtp.west.cox.net> <20090510223606.GB7973@smtp.west.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1b5pre) Gecko/20090427 Shredder/3.0b3pre In-Reply-To: <20090510223606.GB7973@smtp.west.cox.net> Sender: news Subject: Re: [RFC] Bring PREFERRED_LIBC to all distros 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: Mon, 11 May 2009 07:11:13 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11-05-09 00:36, Tom Rini wrote: > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 07:27:42PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> Hello Tom, >> >> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>> Not too wierd looking? Otherwise, is there somewhere we can do, >>> roughly, sort -u, on ${OVERRIDES} ? And not require a new bitbake for >>> everyone? How do you decide which one to drop? The one with a lower or higher priority? You can see how that gets real ugly real fast. >> I belive that we shouldn't add hacks into OE recipes to avoid the >> requirement of new bitbake. If someone is using dev tree we can assume >> that this person can also use a development version from bitbake >> stable branch. > > I don't mean a hack to glibc*.bb, but rather changing base.bbclass (and > anything else) to not blow up if OVERRIDES contains duplicates. I think > it's possible to add a python function that does it, but it would have > to be 'slow' since the fast method is to throw everything into a dict > and then return the list of keys. So perhaps it's best to just say > libc- for an additional per-libc override. libc- is also a lot clearer in the case of newlib :) regards, Koen