Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] meta: uboot-config: Fix broken menuconfig for "fitImage" kernel

[<mike.looijmans@topic.nl>]

On 21-05-2024 16:51, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-05-21 at 15:57 +0200, Mike Looijmans via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
>> kernel-fitimage inherited uboot-config, which resulted in failure to
>> run "menuconfig" on a system that has both multiple u-boot configs and
>> wants a fitImage kernel.
>>
>> Fix the issue by splitting up uboot-config into uboot-config-vars that
>> only contains the "harmless" variable settings, and inherit that in a
>> new uboot-config class which contains the Python code to do the U-boot
>> specific settings. Inherit only uboot-config-vars in kernel-fitimage
>> so that it has what it needs but doesn't break.
>>
>> Fixes: f9e834e31788 "meta: introduce KCONFIG_CONFIG_ENABLE_MENUCONFIG"
>> Signed-off-by: Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans@topic.nl>
>> ---
>>   meta/classes-recipe/kernel-fitimage.bbclass   |  2 +-
>>   meta/classes-recipe/uboot-config-vars.bbclass | 95 +++++++++++++++++++
>>   meta/classes-recipe/uboot-config.bbclass      | 80 +---------------
>>   3 files changed, 97 insertions(+), 80 deletions(-)
>>   create mode 100644 meta/classes-recipe/uboot-config-vars.bbclass
> 
> This looks like it might be a good candidate to move to a file in
> meta/conf rather than a new class file?

What does "this" refer to exactly?

Note that this patch just moves code, it doesn't introduce anything new.

> We could add any functions needed to lib/oe/ if they can be made
> suitably generic.

What "functions" would that be?

M.


-- 
Mike Looijmans
System Expert

TOPIC Embedded Products B.V.
Materiaalweg 4, 5681 RJ Best
The Netherlands

T: +31 (0) 499 33 69 69
E: mike.looijmans@topic.nl
W: www.topic.nl