From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.windriver.com ([147.11.1.11]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Sp029-0000GF-Gc for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:45:01 +0200 Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q6BGXlXX023378 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:33:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wrlaptop (172.25.40.226) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.255.0; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:33:46 -0700 Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:33:33 -0500 From: Peter Seebach To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Message-ID: <20120711113333.76632780@wrlaptop> In-Reply-To: <1342023149.11939.22.camel@ted> References: <22e5e5adc39fb855badc6d1260fbd4b30d966530.1342022120.git.peter.seebach@windriver.com> <1342023149.11939.22.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.4; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] package.bbclass: Allow overriding of debugedit starting path X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:45:01 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:12:29 +0100 Richard Purdie 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 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. 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.) -s -- Listen, get this. Nobody with a good compiler needs to be justified.