From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f52.google.com (mail-it0-f52.google.com [209.85.214.52]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C950601D3 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 10:02:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f52.google.com with SMTP id k132so10584974ita.1 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2017 02:02:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NIYN6ePc8HX4A9CmBZIeK6mJ25li+1tXlIKf3jNF0e0=; b=Rfkn+hEBcYgWx89S8psoANOoH8d9htuZB+koA09vxvnA/Wc4vU/1S4XwWqtwWzNSRc lmoPlA6jyAOa9Dk5NdIpS4cULN4kpvieX+Z1WWmcowMMTZawJOlKCPrzuCKgYsnf0jJK TYO8+VtNf9ccvRa/TxLLZAObQUQNIH76dAyUpMSczXNzRY8ACZH6cjrooCzUlqyzVNLf QfoeYt1WeFZOHI8fjf68c3XPK3RBZDT8YBq6fXrKWVwgmA8FeX6YbYtIOoNa/fsGQU4b WnH/4E9NUHsYNyxm33T/wf5C0hLU3Rd+GQYdRhDlvV9zT2+3lnbJXTj2msQiCrdM7hQ7 73gg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NIYN6ePc8HX4A9CmBZIeK6mJ25li+1tXlIKf3jNF0e0=; b=hHwatPKelpnILOld6TzOZLaaakMiRE55PgpXoe8OtElATect4HvwmhvaKlS6MzyWuu eijYNFuPXS077eTZzRdM9nRnk89L0dEqKt+MDTpctkitbntKNAkQmcxjtGyWi9IZjGH7 fnYBYIzbw1O03Cvja1sgflxAh5pALDBaOYb0zjHKeyZETBiyMCFf2ngxtTwuB/mvzjmU 57nK8nmJ8U5Qb0Al+kmBYTqybo22g5ppkbE9vfpuQx5cTh0K4Iam3ChHerZUWKMFRQ47 dTynCtYzm5pKeJleGYulfFLc0cawjBGZWWphZ+OvF3OxJ/8Bw9x59NXQnis24L2NiEWn 4olA== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXL27NFqJQqBXsEaPPF0hYCEPqqFHsJY6DPLl9mKWc+8hAXWfV94B0ohkEK37SIOcFeF X-Received: by 10.36.120.5 with SMTP id p5mr43718409itc.5.1483524120773; Wed, 04 Jan 2017 02:02:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p57A56308.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [87.165.99.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e5sm11168263ioj.43.2017.01.04.02.01.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Jan 2017 02:01:59 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1483524116.28169.33.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Ricardo Neri Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 11:01:56 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1482961124.106950.55.camel@ranerica-desktop> References: <1482961124.106950.55.camel@ranerica-desktop> Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] ovmf: deploy firmware in image directory X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 10:02:01 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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.