From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com (mail-wm0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82D0D6FEE0 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:49:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f54.google.com with SMTP id u206so19830572wme.1 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 02:49:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=vBXtK1vTojeFb5w4lKyLymXTKmm/PehqynbSYgdUA4Q=; b=ckVEmbiAfX8vuqe8ZDB1rcE7Up2xRkMvASNlkvf9j1SzXzuL/ucVAZWgYBKmAp4XNm WLb8HuxFeBQqTk0GO+dBq76fEUYYtaz+uTFTI9tibM+7Jg+M/yaR/+kY0KIPAlUbbZUk MEj66QK4zc9GK1NqoVBIBDZl4E6/bU4bCYXitmSTJFmDRzSTXfhMs28EIin2RkUCwByG VZekXlqnNIbLzXzFuZzyyXbCbJyClPkY67w364DZPz0IuOxszp1lCboTW4aXK6eE6sao 7zfZKuh14R96ueZzbMW5IFJU6E/cqmyI41v5/MXX0S2xQc8EPcwu9KEVEUlybQureKld q1Eg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=vBXtK1vTojeFb5w4lKyLymXTKmm/PehqynbSYgdUA4Q=; b=bsuZYOjXdnxtZwJEbxC5kViDRA7e2V70kO9QdEtjcatchR1uwn0CBbzhM2q0viftBE o1tkXvDNqLBuDNiHWXWMHteFVkjGJnPK9ID4uaaZ9dNpa/04WdUzxq8YQVVMspOTLm0X G6jT4n+xZhVvcPTCDog+R9S2/ZmZ5Xg3lhLZd95Y2ieE2S0TM80AGZwpyW6mBYRNwVTO aXviixRFRJSHRd5z6147p7oXTMtq0Um7gFCx0/doFfhVDO9/fRhAhmL9z7nu1EfLfQnQ xO+/Kp45O1CTcGBMtUu4cZq+/qNPeZTUwE8s2RlQp5NJ19k2DbYkhdWH4UQOgQa6iIEW wnsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXyZk/VYV5EHOYI1tsGhLP6F7d1hx8DBWwtD91SP93W1DMEuTW8bceQDx7CikrinA== X-Received: by 10.28.226.213 with SMTP id z204mr1951889wmg.99.1461059343083; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 02:49:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([86.49.34.37]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id dd10sm68700414wjb.38.2016.04.19.02.49.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 02:49:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Martin Jansa X-Google-Original-From: Martin Jansa Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:50:52 +0200 To: Otavio Salvador Message-ID: <20160419095052.GB2562@jama> References: <1456610987-17836-1-git-send-email-Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> <20160325105025.GC2555@jama> <1458905339.3073.53.camel@linuxfoundation.org> <20160325115503.GE2555@jama> <1461019553.9308.223.camel@linuxfoundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Cc: OE-core Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] base.bbclass: Introduce EXTRA_CONF_PACKAGECONFIG variable 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: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:49:05 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 81001 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ftEhullJWpWg/VHq" Content-Disposition: inline --ftEhullJWpWg/VHq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 07:49:51PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Richard Purdie > wrote: > > On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 19:31 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Martin Jansa >> > wrote: > >> > Was there some agreement about variable name? > >> > >> meta-qt5 5.6 is using this so we need a final decision if it will be > >> merged or not. I am in favor it as I think it is clear enough. > > > > It was an RFC and I still don't get a good feeling about the names > > used. > > > > I suggested: > > > > PACKAGECONFIG_CONFPARAMS > > or > > PACKAGECONFIG_CONFARGS >=20 > I like CONFARGS. I'll send patch with PACKAGECONFIG_CONFARGS and wait until it's merged somewhere, before updating usages of this in other layers (so that I don't need to redo it again if the name is changed again). > > as it then makes things slightly clearer these things are coming from > > PACKAGECONFIG. We have a namespace which is a bit of a mess and I'd > > prefer to try and improve with new things if we can... > > > > The fact meta-qt5 is already using this is bad, it really shouldn't be. > > We're also very close to the final build of 2.1 right now so this would > > be a very late change :/. meta-qt5/master isn't using it, it's only in master-next, because without this change the builds are broken when people use openembedded-core/meta/conf/distro/include/no-static-libs.inc e.g. with default Poky config. > I think it is a safe change but I am fine in postponing it for 2.2. In > this case we need to revert the usage of it in meta-qt5 (which I also > support). Nothing needs to be reverted, because it wasn't merged in any permanent layer. If it doesn't go to 2.1 then I'll leave meta-qt5/krogoth version broken for Poky builds with no-static-libs.inc. --=20 Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com --ftEhullJWpWg/VHq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlcV/3sACgkQN1Ujt2V2gByz8gCeP+kLrWl8J4lyyo6mga7U5NwA sfAAn1cBuD/VLk2cRN6rUexl4tINiFWe =/aKX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ftEhullJWpWg/VHq--