From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f50.google.com (mail-pa0-f50.google.com [209.85.220.50]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FCE36B05F for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 16:43:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id kp14so2062704pab.23 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 08:43:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type; bh=JZpboaRkenuceXfceehAcS3K5espy1UzDl5D1b7yH8k=; b=X7Do5qLrIDcyesPnWt1S7K7+5qsbnUWZ4JysQc1y02qf+cCiat/voxotYyi7XoZ1oq varXm0ATM4crlahpJStgbmLI2bcIg9rAO2GzfzIk4LmLAuXbxU9MZt8tOtrCwxle7Zty +ZbWYL0Ghk9TxPVgRMuHHy1sDp89utoUMKcG4qTa7eDevehkw72hqB5gaSATYolSeNZz NsrZfKAj5ehjMrg07P3EAkxYaiYtmKR6eAtOV++7lYyYvlVHK1Zk+wGKdmeeLL01rhea P3TJFUuEK0xjllqId9KZZ1ADOgAuljTkXKeq2XGveGl8xyG+tlCK/zIMeLISo6uFzOkL Stew== X-Received: by 10.66.26.236 with SMTP id o12mr9338718pag.15.1390495397878; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 08:43:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from leo.localnet (99-57-140-30.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [99.57.140.30]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qq5sm38562156pbb.24.2014.01.23.08.43.15 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 23 Jan 2014 08:43:15 -0800 (PST) From: Khem Raj To: Chris Larson Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 08:43:29 -0800 Message-ID: <5712962.WyPAeLeASC@leo> X-Face: (*D:+-|[O9m:a&dKxg#R`m^NxyRMPm0'o70t~39kUjcE\?l`>41l^%&x; O ss*RIK.m#<6OwX.R&K={4[\RYyqeUgI^7G0BRJfLXVkrEjSlX5rk\rOt"ur?`%"2}`hDBt QHQ|<@r6-hq"([T&r02ayw^tEXBwsh6g%qt!Q?)*H$OE6mk^BUm30s`G[u:_wi&vIUh&Lh L_.\+; 0Q:nB(8TJq\bWseix)aav+[*-wMDT5+55W^jS%u-J{Hv)&lSoaU^m_+*>]" User-Agent: KMail/4.12.1 (Linux/3.12.8-1-ARCH; KDE/4.12.1; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1386380546-13936-1-git-send-email-raj.khem@gmail.com> <1760931.7HjZTF9m8R@leo> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH] boost: Convert ??= weaker assingment to weak ?= assignment X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 16:43:18 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 49472 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2228375.4JbiU4UDPc"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --nextPart2228375.4JbiU4UDPc Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Thursday, January 23, 2014 09:31:47 AM Chris Larson wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Khem Raj wrote:= > > On Friday, December 06, 2013 05:42:26 PM Khem Raj wrote: > > > ??=3D does not react at all with > > > BOOST_LIBS +=3D "${@base_contains('PACKAGECONFIG', 'python', 'pyt= hon', '', > > > d)}" > > >=20 > > > even though we have > > >=20 > > > PACKAGECONFIG ??=3D "" it does not honor it and always add python= to > > > BOOST_LIBS but the dependency is not added so it fails to build > > > complaining for missing python headers which is a understood outc= ome > > >=20 > > > When converted to ?=3D it works as expected and only add --with-p= ython > > > in bjam when python is specified in PACKAGECONFIG otherwise not. > > >=20 > > > Is it a bitbake bug ? in anycase ?=3D should be enough of loose r= ope > > > to let user/distro configure the packageconfig policy > >=20 > > OK so the problem is that I have meta-ros in my layer-mix and in th= at > > layer > > it defines PACKAGECONFIG ?=3D "python" IMO it should have appended = instead > > of > > redefining. Thats why I was seeing what I was seeing. >=20 > It's worth noting that recipes, in general, should use ?=3D rather th= an ??=3D, > but config files, in general, should use ??=3D. Otherwise it becomes > impossible for the config metadata to define an overriding default --= the > last ??=3D wins, after all, and that would always be the recipe. IMO = default > values in the recipe are there to give sane behavior when there's no > configuration coming in from elsewhere, not to override configuration= > defaults. yes I think thats a good point. so lets consider this patch for inclusi= on now we know the reason, I can resubmit with proper subject and patch he= ader =2D-=20 =2DKhem --nextPart2228375.4JbiU4UDPc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAlLhRrEACgkQuwUzVZGdMxS9lgCghLjifXEjVCIgTTu4E5jkwosO uwUAn2AeP4G02JZp4B9XjL5RzB7ZAFiG =2W+3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2228375.4JbiU4UDPc--