From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QrxP0-0003WN-64 for bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:28:18 +0200 Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Aug 2011 12:23:43 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,352,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="37981066" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.15.3]) ([10.255.15.3]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Aug 2011 12:23:43 -0700 From: Joshua Lock To: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:23:38 -0700 In-Reply-To: <359B10B9B28B294BAA6405D9320312E0111E934078@naemmail08.na.leapfrog.com> References: <359B10B9B28B294BAA6405D9320312E0111E934078@naemmail08.na.leapfrog.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.2 (3.0.2-3.fc15) Message-ID: <1313177023.2228.3.camel@scimitar> Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC] Do postfiles make sense? X-BeenThere: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:28:18 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 11:01 -0700, Daniel Lazzari wrote: > >-----Original Message----- > >Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:27:34 -0700 > >From: Joshua Lock > >Subject: [bitbake-devel] [RFC] Do postfiles make sense? > >To: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org > >Message-ID: <1313105254.2506.8.camel@vorpal.jf.intel.com> > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > > >All, > > > >Some time ago I added an -R switch to bitbake for configuration files to > >load after bitbake.conf[1]. > > > >I'd been happily using this for the UI I've been working on without > >fully realising that it's not safe to rely on postfiles to set variables > >which affect the files included by bitbake.conf. For oe-core this > >includes: BUILD_SYS, TARGET_SYS, MACHINE, SDKMACHINE and DISTRO. > > > >In light of this flaw do postfiles make sense? > > > >For the UI's purpose I think I'm going to have to switch to a prefile > >(-r) in the wrapper script and add logic to hob to detect whether the > >set variables differ from those in hob.local.conf - so that we can warn > >those with a local.conf that uses = assignment that things won't work... > > > >Thoughts? Suggestions? > > > >Thanks, > >Joshua > > > >1. > >http://git.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/bitbake/commit/?id=a8246ae5400c23df > >0d3ee29c36f4d9f257d1e6d1 > >-- > >Joshua Lock > > Yocto Project "Johannes Factotum" > > Intel Open Source Technology Centre > > > > I actually have a decent use case for a postfile. We have several in > house recipes that use an SVN repo for their SRC_URI. The URI contains > a variable that points to what branch to build from. So the recipes > default to pulling the head revision of trunk. It's nice to be able to > have a collection of different conf files that we can post load to > override the branch and revision variables without having to change the > recipes themselves. So we have like a Release1.1.conf file that when > post loaded builds Release 1.1 from the correct branches and revisions. > We can do this with -r by using BRANCH ?= "TRUNK" in the recipes > (that's how we did it in OE Classic), but when we sometimes forgot the > question mark, it would end up building TRUNK no matter what was in the > conf file. Nice, you've convinced me that the feature should stay. Thanks for responding, Joshua -- Joshua Lock Yocto Project "Johannes factotum" Intel Open Source Technology Centre