Re: [PATCH 1/1] netbase: make netbase recipe MACHINE specific for all targets

[Joshua Lock <josh@linux.intel.com>]

On 06/02/12 10:58, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 6 feb. 2012 om 19:33 heeft Joshua Lock<josh@linux.intel.com>  het volgende geschreven:
>> On 04/02/12 08:07, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>> Op 3 feb. 2012, om 18:15 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
>>>> On 02/02/2012 10:59 AM, Joshua Lock wrote:
>>>>> On 02/02/12 10:54, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Op 2 feb. 2012, om 19:51 heeft Joshua Lock het volgende
>>>>>> geschreven:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Several BSP's are appending netbase to add MACHINE specific
>>>>>>> networking functionality. Rather than BSP creators having to
>>>>>>> mark netbase MACHINE specific just default to PACKAGE_ARCH =
>>>>>>> "${MACHINE_ARCH}" in netbase.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This shouldn't be a huge hit as netbase just copies files
>>>>>>> around.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the past OE would mark things machine specific if something in
>>>>>> SRC_URI was fetched using overrides. So it this patches fixed
>>>>>> netbase the 'old' mechanism is broken :(
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch doesn't fix netbase, I just thought it would be simpler to
>>>>> make this change than ensure all BSP's use appropriate OVERRIDEs in
>>>>> their netbase bbappends - several I've seen don't.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is there a consensus on whether or not this can go in? I need either
>>>> this or the BSP layer fix for a new BSP. It seems to me that netbase is
>>>> overridden enough for machine specific things (like the interface file)
>>>> that Joshua's approach is the better fix.
>>>
>>> It all depends on how much crap in BSPs you want to fix up in OE-core. Where are you going to draw the line?
>>
>> I understand you don't like this change but I don't really understand why?
>>
>> My intention with the patch is to make it easier for folks to produce BSP's which don't introduce bugs into other builds for the same architecture.
>
> You're not making it easier, you're just fixing up bugs in the BSP in oe-core. So where do you draw 
the line on that?

Thanks for persisting.

As I understand your argument: BSP developers still need to understand 
the intricacies involved as soon as they make a similar change to a 
non-netbase recipe?

I can't and won't disagree with that.

I could argue that, in the specific case of netbase, it's reasonable to 
expect the resultant package file to be MACHINE specific. For example, I 
wouldn't expect to take the network configuration from my laptop, copy 
it to my workstation and for it to all work.

Either way, I'm not attached to this patch but I do think the discussion 
has been useful.

Thanks,
Joshua
-- 
Joshua Lock
         Yocto Project "Johannes factotum"
         Intel Open Source Technology Centre