Re: [PATCH 4/9] ovmf: deploy firmware in image directory

[Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@intel.com>]

On Wed, 2016-12-28 at 13:38 -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> >  do_install_class-target() {
> > -    OVMF_DIR_SUFFIX="X64"
> > -    if [ "${TARGET_ARCH}" != "x86_64" ] ; then
> > -        OVMF_DIR_SUFFIX="Ia32" # Note the different capitalization
> > -    fi
> > +    # Traditional location.
> >      install -d ${D}${datadir}/ovmf
> > +    install -m 0755 ${WORKDIR}/ovmf/OVMF.fd ${D}${datadir}/ovmf/bios.bin
> 
> Now that I think about it. Installing here does not sever any purpose.
> Thus, I think this can be removed by perhaps doing do_install[noexec] =
> "1"

I was trying not to break traditional usage patterns. If we keep the
"bios" runqemu parameters, then we should also keep the bios.bin file.

> > +}
> >  
> > -    FIXED_GCCVER=$(fixup_target_tools ${GCC_VER})
> > -    build_dir="${S}/Build/Ovmf$OVMF_DIR_SUFFIX/RELEASE_${FIXED_GCCVER}"
> > -    install -m 0755 ${build_dir}/FV/OVMF.fd \
> > -	${D}${datadir}/ovmf/bios.bin
> > +inherit deploy
> 
> I am not sure if there is a right way for inheriting in bitbake.
> However, a quick grep -n inherit reveals that the majority of the
> recipes put their inheritances towards the top of the recipe.

Agreed, that seems to be more common, although there are also examples
where "inherit deploy" is directly in front of "do_deploy". I chose the
latter because it was a more localized change, but will change it in
rev2.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.