From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f178.google.com (mail-io0-f178.google.com [209.85.223.178]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1083A77DAF for ; Wed, 17 May 2017 13:39:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f178.google.com with SMTP id k91so9284071ioi.1 for ; Wed, 17 May 2017 06:39:44 -0700 (PDT) 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=Bv5Jyi5ro8H/Go2OBmnXzsOfxhL+we0NFyJo1+UXyoA=; b=Wc67CGjklWDUapdmnK3FA7XzOTUaJzVqlj3U+cEeYztpVu82s6jbPRNKV9cFXUrerH OIKUCPlmenQ0FBOvYntgUf+S5Lz7FcSq+6zc+gZ0oxNv4AsIc2QdiK/3PdwLTP5YBada XDrMEsRRDIi12uZ0xEBc2ZDzimnoMpy5C6ubgbzw3g/cU1E8+v5EYUCYoPQTV3FrEZOB 4woWU1+ZRr9e7x+xVb2C39nFRV6IAW3mmwb4goVceZFjtT7cr1YBPygfZIbvivwmq8sB n7XoIWqoZmR7BTdV8pK+eGt3nIxeylDmeyQLbUtxWa4TSjsM63Ah3UWrLebmNL+LFPJv aT1A== 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=Bv5Jyi5ro8H/Go2OBmnXzsOfxhL+we0NFyJo1+UXyoA=; b=R+urubtRynuNuYvwH3PqO7ncyQ1FS05RtI0F9vxQFZDCLomKkKJ+Tj4mMxG4YS0BuR zgRThQpxmCwtZEgl3/6ipp1ZIbxKFKPFb2SvyZND4L+O0IsKfLXOMSlS7brFNCYpZSqe FtjnvnZTEdo5rLynbefNAvm3zTeDE4SqbSwymVNU/cz2WbwHnlgSoFIXcvHFPD7l47hp TZGrhGmLFGoLkD7M59ApMsE9OJSA/hlQN3pAsUDc6k8h33B4igUxaYJYmPp01V8Ns8i5 3LRaMoUNosVp+5D+YGLgMjIDV11g8PgS2lE/is4eogopZ50CnJt2jpDEof6gAxTUJW9B bzGA== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCS8wZc/kgp4qhpyIzgIGTxv/ZlkH5B3MoHorCgFqVo8CQaIprP TCEeO07WtJ4XzSS2 X-Received: by 10.107.180.135 with SMTP id d129mr3146620iof.73.1495028383538; Wed, 17 May 2017 06:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8F2FD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.242.253]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v18sm1119883ita.18.2017.05.17.06.39.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 17 May 2017 06:39:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1495028379.28624.46.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Alexander Kanavin Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 15:39:39 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <8810a4bbb1c67b438a7320df810db02099fcb5a0.1495007905.git-series.patrick.ohly@intel.com> <6d634eb4-a0e6-7f56-0d6e-b1324eece035@linux.intel.com> <1495018023.28624.38.camel@intel.com> 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 v2 1/1] image-mode.bbclass: common infrastructure for choosing image defaults 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, 17 May 2017 13:39:44 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 15:56 +0300, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > On 05/17/2017 01:47 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > > I know that you prefer defining more image recipes over allowing the > > reconfiguration of the same image recipe. I disagree on that, because > > when you have independent aspects (like content and login > > configuration), then you end up with various combinations of those > > configuration options. Writing down all combinations in pre-defined > > image recipes just doesn't scale. But you are welcome to proof me wrong > > by showing how the existing image recipes in OE-core should be changed > > so that they not only cover different content selection, but also what's > > currently done via EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES in local.conf.sample. > > I disagree that it doesn't scale. It scales just fine with a > well-constructed include files hierarchy. I'd even argue that's the only > way to stay sane when there's more than a few product configurations: [...] Now add one more mode and you end up with six instead of two image recipes. That's what I consider not scalable. > This pattern is used throughout openembedded. Take a look at machine or > distro configurations for example, or how both python 2 and 3 can be > supported with a single recipe include and two very short recipes in > meta-python. What does IMAGE_MODE do that include files cannot? It does the same thing in a different way. What is preferred is subjective. I think we've both made our opinion clear. Let's hear from others. -- 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.