Re: questions about WORKDIR and S usage and files/ stuff

["Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>]

On Sat, 21 Feb 2015, Richard Purdie wrote:

> On Sat, 2015-02-21 at 05:09 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:

... snip ...

> >   sticking with those non-patch files, it makes sense that all of
> > them should be processed relative to their location in ${WORKDIR}
> > (which is where they've all been copied), but occasionally, i'll
> > see a recipe that sets:
> >
> >   S = ${WORKDIR}
> >
> > then refers to all those files relative to ${S}. sure, that'll
> > work, but it always struck me as dangerous in case you ever need
> > to use a separate S directory down the road, then you'd have to
> > change the entire recipe.
> >
> >   as an example, consider base-files again, which sets:
> >
> >   S = "${WORKDIR}"
> >
> > but not for any reason that i can see since that recipe consists
> > of nothing but explicit files, and all of their processing is done
> > with respect to ${WORKDIR}, anyway, which strikes me as the right
> > way to do it. so, a question -- what is the point of the
> > base-files recipe setting S to that value? doesn't seem to have
> > any purpose that i can see.
>
> See the recent patches which actually added that.

  sorry, i don't know what recent patches you're talking about ...
that variable setting above has, according to git blame, been part of
the base-files recipe since back in 2005.

  what am i misunderstanding?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================