From: Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>
To: Mike Crowe <mac@mcrowe.com>
Cc: OE Core mailing list <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bitbake.conf, module.bbclass: Support opting out of legacy EXTRA_OEMAKE
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 14:18:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151106131831.GA2550@jama> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151106103004.GA7454@mcrowe.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1895 bytes --]
On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 10:30:04AM +0000, Mike Crowe wrote:
> On Friday 06 November 2015 at 01:16:46 -0800, Andre McCurdy wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Mike Crowe <mac@mcrowe.com> wrote:
> > > Give recipes and classes the ability to opt out of EXTRA_OEMAKE
> > > containing the legacy value without removing other recipe-specific or
> > > local additions.
> >
> > Isn't this possible already from within a recipe or class by using
> >
> > EXTRA_OEMAKE = ...
> >
> > instead of
> >
> > EXTRA_OEMAKE += ...
> >
> > ie what autotools.bbclass, kernel.bbclass and many recipes do already.
> >
> > For the specific case of module.bbclass, changing the EXTRA_OEMAKE
> > assignment to '=' might require some recipes to be tweaked to so that
> > they "inherit module" before adding their own options to EXTRA_OEMAKE,
> > but it seems like a cleaner solution?
>
> It would be, but I was afraid of what I might break. I suspect that there
> are many unseen third-party and local recipes that inherit module.bbclass.
>
> It would be great to get to the point that EXTRA_OEMAKE is empty by default
> but I imagine that the experts are already aware of the difficulties with
> doing this which is why the current value has lasted so long.
Is it really good goal to get rid of "-e"?
I know that the environment used in bitbake tasks is already well
defined and controlled, but I still find a bit more control with -e to
be useful in many cases.
I know I'll be able to return -e where useful, but what's the main
advantage of removing it from default?
Regards,
>
> Mike.
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
--
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-06 13:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-05 14:47 [PATCH] bitbake.conf, module.bbclass: Support opting out of legacy EXTRA_OEMAKE Mike Crowe
2015-11-05 16:23 ` Khem Raj
2015-11-05 16:27 ` Christopher Larson
2015-11-05 17:56 ` Khem Raj
2015-11-06 9:16 ` Andre McCurdy
2015-11-06 10:30 ` Mike Crowe
2015-11-06 13:18 ` Martin Jansa [this message]
2015-11-06 14:59 ` Christopher Larson
2015-11-06 16:28 ` Martin Jansa
2015-11-12 12:10 ` Mike Crowe
2015-11-12 20:21 ` Andre McCurdy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20151106131831.GA2550@jama \
--to=martin.jansa@gmail.com \
--cc=mac@mcrowe.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox