From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65BCE6E668 for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 22:12:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Dec 2015 14:12:46 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,410,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="869150151" Received: from bitbang.jf.intel.com (HELO [10.7.199.175]) ([10.7.199.175]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Dec 2015 14:12:46 -0800 To: "Burton, Ross" References: <49ad2cee12cc6fdf471ea3e600afb7949138beb6.1449693306.git.randy.e.witt@linux.intel.com> From: Randy Witt Message-ID: <5669F8DD.9010108@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:12:45 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Cc: OE-core Subject: Re: [jethro][master][PATCH 1/1] uninative.bbclass: Choose the correct loader based on BUILD_ARCH 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: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 22:12:47 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/10/2015 02:01 PM, Burton, Ross wrote: > On 9 December 2015 at 20:50, Randy Witt > wrote: > >> -UNINATIVE_LOADER = "${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2" >> +UNINATIVE_LOADER ?= "${@bb.utils.contains('BUILD_ARCH', 'x86_64', >> '${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2', >> '${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}/lib/ld-linux.so.2', d)}" >> > > Would it be neater, and more flexible when other arches are different > (specifically I'm thinking of aarch64 here) to do: > > UNINATIVE_LOADER = "${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}/lib/ld-linux.so.2" > UNINATIVE_LOADER_x86-64 = "'${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2" Yes, I like that better. I'll check the override and test it again. > At least I think that overload is correct... > > Ross >