From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2CAD70031 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 18:08:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Mar 2016 11:08:31 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,407,1455004800"; d="scan'208,217";a="773270934" Received: from mlopezva-mobl2.zpn.intel.com (HELO [10.219.26.0]) ([10.219.26.0]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Mar 2016 11:08:31 -0700 To: Christopher Larson , openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org References: <34e4b28e8c8e665b38fd82d59ecaf8d486de6193.1458803813.git.mariano.lopez@linux.intel.com> From: Mariano Lopez Message-ID: <56F97344.9040204@linux.intel.com> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 12:09:08 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] archiver.bbclass: Just archive gcc-source for all gcc recipes 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: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 18:08:31 -0000 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010405030208040600000705" --------------010405030208040600000705 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 03/24/2016 12:04 PM, Christopher Larson wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 8:26 AM > wrote: > > From: Mariano Lopez > > + # We just archive gcc-source for all the gcc related recipes > + if d.getVar('BPN', True) in ['gcc', 'libgcc'] \ > + and not pn.startswith('gcc-source'): > + bb.debug(1, 'archiver: %s is excluded, covered by > gcc-source' % pn) > + return > > > Hmm, I wonder if it'd be possible to make this more generic, check for > work-shared or something. I was thinking the same when writing the patch, but it seems gcc is more of a corner case. The only two recipes that use work-shared are gcc and the kernel, the kernel case it's already covered checking for the class "kernel-yocto". In case of gcc we can't check for a class, we would need for work-shared and gcc, and that would be the almost the same comparison as is in the patch. Mariano --------------010405030208040600000705 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 03/24/2016 12:04 PM, Christopher Larson wrote:


On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 8:26 AM <mariano.lopez@linux.intel.com> wrote:
From: Mariano Lopez <mariano.lopez@linux.intel.com>
+    # We just archive gcc-source for all the gcc related recipes
+    if d.getVar('BPN', True) in ['gcc', 'libgcc'] \
+            and not pn.startswith('gcc-source'):
+        bb.debug(1, 'archiver: %s is excluded, covered by gcc-source' % pn)
+        return

Hmm, I wonder if it'd be possible to make this more generic, check for work-shared or something.

I was thinking the same when writing the patch, but it seems gcc is more of a corner case. The only two recipes that use work-shared are gcc and the kernel, the kernel case it's already covered checking for the class "kernel-yocto". In case of gcc we can't check for a class, we would need for work-shared and gcc, and that would be the almost the same comparison as is in the patch.

Mariano
--------------010405030208040600000705--