Re: [PATCH] allarch: Allow class to be included but overridden

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 09:19 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 09:08 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Richard Purdie
> >> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >> > We have cases where we'd like to inherit this class by default but allow
> >> > special cases to override it. This change makes the code of the class
> >> > conditional on PACKAGE_ARCH remaining set to "all", allowing it to be
> >> > overridden. packagegroup usage is one case this is desirable.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
> >> > ---
> >>
> >> Richard, I fail to see the usecase of packagroup. Can you clarify?
> >
> > packagegroup.bbclass previously set PACKAGE_ARCH = "all" which was
> > confusing other code. Anything using the all package arch should really
> > use allarch so we are consistent about how we set the various variables.
> >
> > Even though packagegroup.bbclass now uses allarch, we need specific
> > packagegroup packages to be able to override the class e.g. marking
> > themselves machine specific. This is why we need to make this change.
> 
> My only concern is if we could make allarch to raise an exception if
> you inherit it and set package arch to another value?

We're deciding that we're supporting that exact usecase though?

> The only bad effect about it is we won't be able to change something
> in a bbappend which makes the package arch specific that way.

Why not? This should be perfectly usable from a .bbappend?

Cheers,

Richard