From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [194.106.48.114] (helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HcTwp-0004Iy-40 for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Sat, 14 Apr 2007 00:08:51 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l3DM8o2B009242 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 23:08:50 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 09031-04 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 23:08:47 +0100 (BST) Received: from max.rpnet.com (max.rpnet.com [192.168.1.15]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l3DM8jJH009235 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 23:08:45 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org In-Reply-To: <461FD9AF.6050403@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> References: <46176E51.2030608@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> <1176049069.5844.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200704110850.48209.openembedded@hrw.one.pl> <461FD9AF.6050403@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 23:08:46 +0100 Message-Id: <1176502126.5836.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: [RFC] rm_work X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:08:51 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 21:27 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > Marcin Juszkiewicz schreef: > > > Maybe rm_work.bbclass should do: > > > > BB_DEFAULT_TASK = "rm_work" > > addtask rm_work after do_build > > This patch works for me: This makes me very nervous since thats not how that variable was intended to be used and I don't think its a good idea in the long term. Can we try and fix bitbake to allow the correct syntax needed and then write the metadata in a less invasive way? That trick works precisely once if you want an illustration of why its bad. Richard