From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NbFCr-0000YV-Ub for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:25:57 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NbFAY-0004J7-Cb for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:23:30 +0100 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 ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:23:30 +0100 Received: from k.kooi by s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:23:30 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:23:06 +0100 Message-ID: References: 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 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100114 Shredder/3.0.2pre In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0 Sender: news X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 80.91.229.12 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gcho-openembedded-devel@m.gmane.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on linuxtogo.org); Unknown failure Subject: Re: {RFC] console-image.bb 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: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 15:25:57 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 30-01-10 11:35, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > Today I bumped into console-image and noticed the following: > > IMAGE_INSTALL = "task-base \ > ${ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL} \ > ${SPLASH} \ > ${ZZAPSPLASH} \ > > Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g. > DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ? > This under the assumption that console-image is a distro independent recipe. > > Or, in case this is an angstrom specific recipe shouldn't it be better > named angstrom-console-image ? > > your views are appreciated :-) I vote for leaving it as it is, it gives some credit to where it originated from. The image name already has been forcefully renamed to strip out 'angstrom' so lets keep at least this bit of heritage. Besides, who's going to fix all users of ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL? regards, Koen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFLZE7ZMkyGM64RGpERAjNMAJ4i4uyZeQFuJ+HDtqa8dbMXXxsWWQCfY0p8 3IiVq82EW/8VVA3bWWjraxg= =R852 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----