From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QMTWu-0000RC-Hx for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 18 May 2011 01:18:20 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p4HNFRIv021720 for ; Wed, 18 May 2011 00:15:27 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 21281-08 for ; Wed, 18 May 2011 00:15:19 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p4HNFFek021705 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 18 May 2011 00:15:15 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer In-Reply-To: <4DD2FE07.4030708@linux.intel.com> References: <4DD2FE07.4030708@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 00:15:13 +0100 Message-ID: <1305674113.3424.292.camel@rex> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] u-boot: remove UBOOT_MACHINE and COMPATIBLE_MACHINES X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 23:18:20 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 16:00 -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > oe-core does not define any machines, so it does not make sense to > add machine specific information in the oe-core u-boot recipe and > infrastructure. > > Since every machine wishing to use the u-boot recipe would need to add itself to > COMPATIBLE_MACHINES, typically via a bbappend recipe, the mechanism loses any > utility it may have had and unecessarily complicates using the u-boot recipe. By > removing it, we simplify the task of adding support for new machines. NAK. This break usability of things like "bitbake world" since all of a sudden it will try and build u-boot in cases where it makes no sense (qemu* machines for example). I know it sounds strange but we do want this recipe enabled on a case by case basis (and we have the beagleboard as a reference platform using it which is handy). This means the default of no supported machine is correct even if it looks odd. Having the recipe deselect itself (raise a skip parsing event) if UBOOT_MACHINE isn't set instead of using COMPATIBLE_MACHINE would be acceptable though. Cheers, Richard