On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 11:33 -0500, Peter Seebach wrote:

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:12:29 +0100
Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

I think I at least would find this slightly less confusing as:

workparentdir = d.getVar("DEBUGSRC_OVERRIDE_PATH", True) or
os.path.dirname(workdir)

Wait, LESS confusing?

I appear to have tragically misunderstood the design goals of
package.bbclass. :P

Well, we are trying over time... :)

But yes, that's a good improvement. Applied locally.

Speaking of confusing: If purely hypothetically I wanted to
submit a patch which standardized the indentation in package.bbclass,
would anyone be interested in that? I ask only because while I can
accept either 8-space or 4-space indentation, I find it comforting when
any given file full of Python source uses one or the other.

It should all use 4 space for python functions. There is however a twist

which is due to the way we handle _prepend and _append. Those prepends

and appends have whitespace too and I seem to remember issues with

whitespace matching.

Yes, this is horrible. This is why that file hasn't been touched for

whitespace though.

And while there's currently only a couple of blocks of 4-space
indentation in the file, we *normally* use 4-space, that's the
quasi-official Python community norm, and a LOT of the "too long" lines
in that file would be much more readable at 4 spaces.

(This would be a totally separate patch, and I'm not super happy about
the idea of a patch which updates half or more of the lines in the
file, but it's not as though it'll be less painful to fix later.)

I'd be interested to see how much breakage we get from changing it. In

fact I just tried it, the result:

http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=rpurdie/t14&id=3db917bfb2455715a3a3a542ea831d05ca1cf9f7

the particularly nasty bit:

python populate_packages () {

# Whitespace is deliberately a tab here due to the number of packages which

# prepend this fuction :(

populate_packages_core(d)

}

other than that it does seem to be working as long as I tweaked the

busybox recipe and update-alternatives too. We could go through and

change all the populate_packages_prepend functions but its the ones

outside OE-Core I worry about. I also worry there are some _append

functions now silently failing though :(.

Cheers,

Richard

_______________________________________________

Openembedded-core mailing list

Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org

http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core