Re: [PATCH] utility-task: Add do_patchall task

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

On Tue, 2017-03-07 at 13:48 -0600, Matthew McClintock wrote:
> This is useful in a few scenarios:
> 
> 1) A developer wants to be able to grep all the code in a particular
> without having to run patch on various components until they guess
> the
> right one (e.g. which component is generating an error/warning?)
> 
> 2) Other code scanning tools that can be run without requiring a full
> image to be built (legal, static code analysis, etc)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew McClintock <msm-oss@mcclintock.net>
> ---
>  meta/classes/utility-tasks.bbclass | 7 +++++++
>  meta/conf/documentation.conf       | 1 +
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)

I have mixed feelings on this. Whilst I can see the attraction, extra
tasks like this do actually have a parsing overhead. We already have a
lot of them and its only a question of time before someone wants
another XXXall task adding.

I'm wondering if we can solve this at the bitbake level instead with a
new parameter instead? That would allow us to delete tasks and speed up
parsing rather than slow things down.

Cheers,

Richard