Re: [PATCH] busybox: move default config fragments to defconfig

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

On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 10:16 +0200, Peter Bergin wrote:
> On 2017-03-29 01:02, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 2017-03-28 at 22:08 +0200, Peter Bergin wrote:
> > > 
> > > Move config fragments that are unconditionally and always applied
> > > to the configuration to the default defconfig file. This will
> > > make it easier to provide your own defconfig file for your
> > > target.
> > > 
> > > The problem this commit will solve is that if you provide your
> > > own
> > > defconfig file for your target it will be tampered with by the
> > > configuration fragments in SRC_URI. If you not want those
> > > configurations in your own setup you have to modify SRC_URI
> > > variable in your setup. As those confguration fragment was always
> > > applied it is a better solution to have them in the default
> > > defconfig file instead.
> > This basically removes any standard feature grouping from being
> > used in
> > the base busybox recipe. I don't think this is something we want to
> > encourage, I'd actually like to see more feature group usage.
> > 
> > So we need to find some other way of solving your issue.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Richard
> I agree that it is nice and encouraged to group configurations
> together and make them selectable as a group.

Also, in case its not apparent, you can work around this today by
providing empty fragment files in your own layer. These would override
the default ones in the main recipe if you set it up right.

Cheers,

Richard