From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bastet.se.axis.com (bastet.se.axis.com [195.60.68.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24DA760111 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 08:52:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bastet.se.axis.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C0F1828A; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:52:16 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at bastet.se.axis.com Received: from bastet.se.axis.com ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bastet.se.axis.com [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id qD-Em14unXKe; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:52:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from boulder02.se.axis.com (boulder02.se.axis.com [10.0.8.16]) by bastet.se.axis.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA77A18282; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:52:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from boulder02.se.axis.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F5961A09C; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:52:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from boulder02.se.axis.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83E221A09A; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:52:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from thoth.se.axis.com (unknown [10.0.2.173]) by boulder02.se.axis.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:52:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from XBOX01.axis.com (xbox01.axis.com [10.0.5.15]) by thoth.se.axis.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 780C1E01; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:52:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from XBOX02.axis.com (10.0.5.16) by XBOX01.axis.com (10.0.5.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:52:15 +0100 Received: from XBOX02.axis.com ([fe80::50c3:4d2f:4507:7776]) by XBOX02.axis.com ([fe80::50c3:4d2f:4507:7776%21]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:52:15 +0100 From: Peter Kjellerstedt To: Khem Raj , "Robert P. J. Day" Thread-Topic: [OE-core] can "IMAGE_INSTALL ?= ..." not be written in a more obvious way? Thread-Index: AQHSUyquW4CpprPehU2klYhnSyJ/EqEFk/rA Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 08:52:15 +0000 Message-ID: <7aafe397c8214239a49d3cf09480d388@XBOX02.axis.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.0.5.60] MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 Cc: OE Core mailing list Subject: Re: can "IMAGE_INSTALL ?= ..." not be written in a more obvious way? 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, 13 Dec 2016 08:52:19 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Original Message----- > From: openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org > [mailto:openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of > Khem Raj > Sent: den 10 december 2016 22:16 > To: Robert P. J. Day > Cc: OE Core mailing list > Subject: Re: [OE-core] can "IMAGE_INSTALL ?=3D ..." not be written in a > more obvious way? >=20 > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 3:40 AM, Robert P. J. Day > wrote: > > > > i've nattered about this before but not sure i ever got an answer -- > > here's the last bit of core-image.bbclass: > > > > CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL =3D '\ > > packagegroup-core-boot \ > > packagegroup-base-extended \ > > \ > > ${CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL} \ > > ' > > > > CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL ?=3D "" > > > > IMAGE_INSTALL ?=3D "${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL}" > > > > the first time i saw that (long ago), it took me a few looks to figure > > out what was happening. can this not be written in a more obvious way: > > > > CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL =3D '\ > > packagegroup-core-boot \ > > packagegroup-base-extended \ > > ' > > > > CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL ?=3D "" > > > > IMAGE_INSTALL ?=3D " \ > > ${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL} \ > > ${CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL} \ > > " > > > > is that not equivalent, or am i missing something? it's certainly > > clearer as to what's happening if people are perusing the code. >=20 > They are same AFAICT, dont feel strongly about readability but feel > free to send a patch Careful now. Changing these can affect image recipes outside of OE-core. If one has an image recipe that inherits core-image and then defines=20 IMAGE_INSTALL =3D "${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL} my-own-packages ..." then changing CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL as per above would suddenly=20 cause that image to miss including packages that it previously did. I recommend leaving it as is. //Peter