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 1S1nH1-0006GT-23 for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:12:59 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q1QN4X6J019386; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:04:33 GMT 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 18792-06; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:04:25 +0000 (GMT) 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 q1QN4ItS019380 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:04:19 GMT Message-ID: <1330297460.31855.24.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Leon Woestenberg Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:04:20 +0000 In-Reply-To: References: <1330261561.31855.6.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: bitbake parsing of IMAGE_INSTALL += # tslib mtd-utils" extremely user unfriendly. 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: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:12:59 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 2012-02-26 at 20:35 +0100, Leon Woestenberg wrote: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Richard Purdie > wrote: > On Mon, 2012-02-20 at 23:00 +0100, Leon Woestenberg wrote: > > bitbake can really braindump on us when we insert typo's. > The result > > of bitbake 1.14 parsing this one wasn't pleasant: > > > > IMAGE_INSTALL += # tslib mtd-utils" > > > > (Yes, it's a typo. No, I wouldn't expect bitbake to give me > that much > > output :) ) > > I agree we need to fix that. I've proposed a patch to bitbake > which > would allow detection and a better error message for something > like this > by enforcing quoting of variables. It is a major change in > bitbake's > behaviour though so I'm taking feedback on whether we should > make the > change. > > If we focus on our user interface view, that would mean this will no > longer work: > > SOME_BINARY_VARIABLE = 1 > > but that might be a better compromise than what we currently have. FWIW, internally, that is still a string even if it looks a bit like a binary value so there is no effective change. Cheers, Richard