Openembedded Core Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
To: OE Core mailing list <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: efficacy of defining overriding linux-yocto...bb recipe file?
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 05:30:47 -0500 (EST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.11.1502250522510.32674@localhost> (raw)


  recently began looking at someone's else layer and noticed that that
layer defined a new kernel recipe by (yeesh) creating its very own
"linux-yocto_3.14.bb" file. not a bbappend file -- its very own .bb
file, which i thought was kind of weird.

  just to make sure i'm not missing any subtleties, there are only two
*recommended* ways i know of to define/extend kernel recipes. first,
just a regular .bbappend file ... nuff said.

  the second is how, say, the meta-fsl people do it (which i like), by
defining totally new, fsl-specific recipes:

linux-fslc_3.18.bb
linux-imx_2.6.35.3.bb
linux-imx_3.10.53.bb
linux-imx-mfgtool_3.10.53.bb
linux-imx-rt_3.10.31.bb
linux-ls1_3.12.bb
linux-timesys_3.0.15.bb

and then having their machine definition files set something like:

PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel ?= "linux-timesys"

  i've just never seen a layer flat out create its own base-level
"linux-yocto" kernel recipe .bb file. am i safe in suggesting that
that's just not the way things are done? (i'm guessing the only way to
guarantee that *that* recipe file is used is to bump up the priority
value of the layer, yes?)

rday

-- 

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

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


                 reply	other threads:[~2015-02-25 10:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.11.1502250522510.32674@localhost \
    --to=rpjday@crashcourse.ca \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox