* [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
@ 2012-03-23 17:35 Tom Rini
2012-03-26 9:15 ` Richard Purdie
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2012-03-23 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core
As per
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-March/019772.html
a machine conf file should use '=' to set IMAGE_FSTYPES.
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
---
meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc b/meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc
index 10ab76e..b613287 100644
--- a/meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc
+++ b/meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/xserver ?= "xserver-kdrive"
MACHINE_FEATURES = "apm alsa pcmcia bluetooth irda usbgadget screen"
-IMAGE_FSTYPES ?= "tar.bz2 ext3"
+IMAGE_FSTYPES = "tar.bz2 ext3"
ROOT_FLASH_SIZE = "280"
--
1.7.0.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
2012-03-23 17:35 [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES Tom Rini
@ 2012-03-26 9:15 ` Richard Purdie
2012-03-26 16:25 ` Tom Rini
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Richard Purdie @ 2012-03-26 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 10:35 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> As per
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-March/019772.html
> a machine conf file should use '=' to set IMAGE_FSTYPES.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> ---
> meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
As someone pointed out, what I mentioned in that email sadly doesn't
work although it would be nice if they did. I suspect this is why we're
using += since:
> - The machine needs to say 'I need or support the following formats'
so the machine ensures those formats exist at a minimum:
IMAGE_FSTYPES += "xxxx"
> - The distro needs to say 'I always want format X'
so the distro can do:
IMAGE_FSTYPES += " yyy"
> - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me only format X'
This one is the problem case so the user has to use overrides:
IMAGE_FSTYPES_override = "X"
(where override can be MACHINE or forcevariable)
> - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me what you support + X'
IMAGE_FSTYPES += " X"
Whilst I think that is less than ideal since it forces use of overrides
in local.conf to override, changing the += in machine conf files doesn't
gain us much, it just breaks += in local.conf.
I'm open to other feedback though...
Cheers,
Richard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
2012-03-26 9:15 ` Richard Purdie
@ 2012-03-26 16:25 ` Tom Rini
2012-03-26 16:56 ` Richard Purdie
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2012-03-26 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:15:13AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 10:35 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > As per
> > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-March/019772.html
> > a machine conf file should use '=' to set IMAGE_FSTYPES.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> > ---
> > meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc | 2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> As someone pointed out, what I mentioned in that email sadly doesn't
> work although it would be nice if they did. I suspect this is why we're
> using += since:
We aren't using += today. We (openembedded-core) use ?=. meta-intel
uses += and meta-ti is mixed (and I don't have meta-fsl-* handy).
> > - The machine needs to say 'I need or support the following formats'
>
> so the machine ensures those formats exist at a minimum:
>
> IMAGE_FSTYPES += "xxxx"
>
> > - The distro needs to say 'I always want format X'
>
> so the distro can do:
>
> IMAGE_FSTYPES += " yyy"
>
> > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me only format X'
>
> This one is the problem case so the user has to use overrides:
>
> IMAGE_FSTYPES_override = "X"
>
> (where override can be MACHINE or forcevariable)
>
> > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me what you support + X'
>
> IMAGE_FSTYPES += " X"
>
>
> Whilst I think that is less than ideal since it forces use of overrides
> in local.conf to override, changing the += in machine conf files doesn't
> gain us much, it just breaks += in local.conf.
>
> I'm open to other feedback though...
Well, I suggested ??= / ?= and posted some results from bitbake -e...
--
Tom
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
2012-03-26 16:25 ` Tom Rini
@ 2012-03-26 16:56 ` Richard Purdie
2012-03-26 17:13 ` Tom Rini
2012-03-28 18:54 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Richard Purdie @ 2012-03-26 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 09:25 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:15:13AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 10:35 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > As per
> > > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-March/019772.html
> > > a machine conf file should use '=' to set IMAGE_FSTYPES.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> > > ---
> > > meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc | 2 +-
> > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > As someone pointed out, what I mentioned in that email sadly doesn't
> > work although it would be nice if they did. I suspect this is why we're
> > using += since:
>
> We aren't using += today. We (openembedded-core) use ?=. meta-intel
> uses += and meta-ti is mixed (and I don't have meta-fsl-* handy).
>
> > > - The machine needs to say 'I need or support the following formats'
> >
> > so the machine ensures those formats exist at a minimum:
> >
> > IMAGE_FSTYPES += "xxxx"
> >
> > > - The distro needs to say 'I always want format X'
> >
> > so the distro can do:
> >
> > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " yyy"
> >
> > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me only format X'
> >
> > This one is the problem case so the user has to use overrides:
> >
> > IMAGE_FSTYPES_override = "X"
> >
> > (where override can be MACHINE or forcevariable)
> >
> > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me what you support + X'
> >
> > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " X"
> >
> >
> > Whilst I think that is less than ideal since it forces use of overrides
> > in local.conf to override, changing the += in machine conf files doesn't
> > gain us much, it just breaks += in local.conf.
> >
> > I'm open to other feedback though...
>
> Well, I suggested ??= / ?= and posted some results from bitbake -e...
Ok. += plays out as above. I realise its not what is in qemu.inc, it is
used in meta-intel though which I looked at after qemu.inc and I guess
has confused me.
With ?= in machine.conf:
The user defined IMAGE_FSTYPES would override the machine ones. Distro
can still append to it. The downside is a user append would not work out
as expected.
So the question is which is the more user expected behaviour?
=+ makes overwriting IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
?= makes appending IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
I suspect a user is more likely to want to append than overwrite.
Getting an append to work with ?= is extremely non-obvious, even worse
syntax than the =+ overwriting case with overrides.
So bottom line, I'm tempted to recommend we use =+.
Further thoughts?
Cheers,
Richard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
2012-03-26 16:56 ` Richard Purdie
@ 2012-03-26 17:13 ` Tom Rini
2012-03-26 18:39 ` Darren Hart
2012-03-26 19:31 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2012-03-28 18:54 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
1 sibling, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2012-03-26 17:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 05:56:16PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 09:25 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:15:13AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 10:35 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > As per
> > > > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-March/019772.html
> > > > a machine conf file should use '=' to set IMAGE_FSTYPES.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc | 2 +-
> > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > As someone pointed out, what I mentioned in that email sadly doesn't
> > > work although it would be nice if they did. I suspect this is why we're
> > > using += since:
> >
> > We aren't using += today. We (openembedded-core) use ?=. meta-intel
> > uses += and meta-ti is mixed (and I don't have meta-fsl-* handy).
> >
> > > > - The machine needs to say 'I need or support the following formats'
> > >
> > > so the machine ensures those formats exist at a minimum:
> > >
> > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += "xxxx"
> > >
> > > > - The distro needs to say 'I always want format X'
> > >
> > > so the distro can do:
> > >
> > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " yyy"
> > >
> > > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me only format X'
> > >
> > > This one is the problem case so the user has to use overrides:
> > >
> > > IMAGE_FSTYPES_override = "X"
> > >
> > > (where override can be MACHINE or forcevariable)
> > >
> > > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me what you support + X'
> > >
> > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " X"
> > >
> > >
> > > Whilst I think that is less than ideal since it forces use of overrides
> > > in local.conf to override, changing the += in machine conf files doesn't
> > > gain us much, it just breaks += in local.conf.
> > >
> > > I'm open to other feedback though...
> >
> > Well, I suggested ??= / ?= and posted some results from bitbake -e...
>
> Ok. += plays out as above. I realise its not what is in qemu.inc, it is
> used in meta-intel though which I looked at after qemu.inc and I guess
> has confused me.
>
> With ?= in machine.conf:
>
> The user defined IMAGE_FSTYPES would override the machine ones. Distro
> can still append to it. The downside is a user append would not work out
> as expected.
>
> So the question is which is the more user expected behaviour?
>
> =+ makes overwriting IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
>
> ?= makes appending IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
>
> I suspect a user is more likely to want to append than overwrite.
> Getting an append to work with ?= is extremely non-obvious, even worse
> syntax than the =+ overwriting case with overrides.
>
> So bottom line, I'm tempted to recommend we use =+.
I think for the upcoming release, =+ is good enough and we can talk
about adding further variables after if it's still too complicated. So,
now where's the repo that documenting these examples should go in?
--
Tom
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
2012-03-26 17:13 ` Tom Rini
@ 2012-03-26 18:39 ` Darren Hart
2012-03-26 19:31 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Darren Hart @ 2012-03-26 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer; +Cc: Scott Rifenbark
On 03/26/2012 10:13 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
>
> I think for the upcoming release, =+ is good enough and we can talk
> about adding further variables after if it's still too complicated. So,
> now where's the repo that documenting these examples should go in?
>
You want to talk to Scott Rifenbark, on CC.
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
2012-03-26 17:13 ` Tom Rini
2012-03-26 18:39 ` Darren Hart
@ 2012-03-26 19:31 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2012-03-26 19:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:13:59AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 05:56:16PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 09:25 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:15:13AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 10:35 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > > As per
> > > > > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-March/019772.html
> > > > > a machine conf file should use '=' to set IMAGE_FSTYPES.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc | 2 +-
> > > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > As someone pointed out, what I mentioned in that email sadly doesn't
> > > > work although it would be nice if they did. I suspect this is why we're
> > > > using += since:
> > >
> > > We aren't using += today. We (openembedded-core) use ?=. meta-intel
> > > uses += and meta-ti is mixed (and I don't have meta-fsl-* handy).
> > >
> > > > > - The machine needs to say 'I need or support the following formats'
> > > >
> > > > so the machine ensures those formats exist at a minimum:
> > > >
> > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += "xxxx"
> > > >
> > > > > - The distro needs to say 'I always want format X'
> > > >
> > > > so the distro can do:
> > > >
> > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " yyy"
> > > >
> > > > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me only format X'
> > > >
> > > > This one is the problem case so the user has to use overrides:
> > > >
> > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES_override = "X"
> > > >
> > > > (where override can be MACHINE or forcevariable)
> > > >
> > > > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me what you support + X'
> > > >
> > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " X"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Whilst I think that is less than ideal since it forces use of overrides
> > > > in local.conf to override, changing the += in machine conf files doesn't
> > > > gain us much, it just breaks += in local.conf.
> > > >
> > > > I'm open to other feedback though...
> > >
> > > Well, I suggested ??= / ?= and posted some results from bitbake -e...
> >
> > Ok. += plays out as above. I realise its not what is in qemu.inc, it is
> > used in meta-intel though which I looked at after qemu.inc and I guess
> > has confused me.
> >
> > With ?= in machine.conf:
> >
> > The user defined IMAGE_FSTYPES would override the machine ones. Distro
> > can still append to it. The downside is a user append would not work out
> > as expected.
> >
> > So the question is which is the more user expected behaviour?
> >
> > =+ makes overwriting IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
> >
> > ?= makes appending IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
> >
> > I suspect a user is more likely to want to append than overwrite.
> > Getting an append to work with ?= is extremely non-obvious, even worse
> > syntax than the =+ overwriting case with overrides.
> >
> > So bottom line, I'm tempted to recommend we use =+.
>
> I think for the upcoming release, =+ is good enough and we can talk
> about adding further variables after if it's still too complicated. So,
> now where's the repo that documenting these examples should go in?
So, did we come full circle on this? :) Started here:
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/meta-ti/2012-March/000779.html
I'm fine changing it for meta-ti, if we agree on a unified solution. Having an
EXTRA/MACHINE var for that in the future might simplify things...
--
Denys
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
2012-03-26 16:56 ` Richard Purdie
2012-03-26 17:13 ` Tom Rini
@ 2012-03-28 18:54 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2012-03-28 21:11 ` Richard Purdie
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2012-03-28 18:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 05:56:16PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 09:25 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:15:13AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 10:35 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > As per
> > > > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-March/019772.html
> > > > a machine conf file should use '=' to set IMAGE_FSTYPES.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc | 2 +-
> > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > As someone pointed out, what I mentioned in that email sadly doesn't
> > > work although it would be nice if they did. I suspect this is why we're
> > > using += since:
> >
> > We aren't using += today. We (openembedded-core) use ?=. meta-intel
> > uses += and meta-ti is mixed (and I don't have meta-fsl-* handy).
> >
> > > > - The machine needs to say 'I need or support the following formats'
> > >
> > > so the machine ensures those formats exist at a minimum:
> > >
> > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += "xxxx"
> > >
> > > > - The distro needs to say 'I always want format X'
> > >
> > > so the distro can do:
> > >
> > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " yyy"
> > >
> > > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me only format X'
> > >
> > > This one is the problem case so the user has to use overrides:
> > >
> > > IMAGE_FSTYPES_override = "X"
> > >
> > > (where override can be MACHINE or forcevariable)
> > >
> > > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me what you support + X'
> > >
> > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " X"
> > >
> > >
> > > Whilst I think that is less than ideal since it forces use of overrides
> > > in local.conf to override, changing the += in machine conf files doesn't
> > > gain us much, it just breaks += in local.conf.
> > >
> > > I'm open to other feedback though...
> >
> > Well, I suggested ??= / ?= and posted some results from bitbake -e...
>
> Ok. += plays out as above. I realise its not what is in qemu.inc, it is
> used in meta-intel though which I looked at after qemu.inc and I guess
> has confused me.
>
> With ?= in machine.conf:
>
> The user defined IMAGE_FSTYPES would override the machine ones. Distro
> can still append to it. The downside is a user append would not work out
> as expected.
>
> So the question is which is the more user expected behaviour?
>
> =+ makes overwriting IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
>
> ?= makes appending IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
>
> I suspect a user is more likely to want to append than overwrite.
> Getting an append to work with ?= is extremely non-obvious, even worse
> syntax than the =+ overwriting case with overrides.
>
> So bottom line, I'm tempted to recommend we use =+.
>
> Further thoughts?
Richard,
So, what is the subtle difference between += that we started with and =+ that
you recommended at the end? I realize those are for append and prepend, but
are they handled any different? Was your recommendation to use =+ at the end,
instead of += that was used originally, based on some specifics? Thanks.
--
Denys
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
2012-03-28 18:54 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
@ 2012-03-28 21:11 ` Richard Purdie
2012-03-28 23:29 ` Tom Rini
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Richard Purdie @ 2012-03-28 21:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 14:54 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 05:56:16PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 09:25 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:15:13AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 10:35 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > > As per
> > > > > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-March/019772.html
> > > > > a machine conf file should use '=' to set IMAGE_FSTYPES.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc | 2 +-
> > > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > As someone pointed out, what I mentioned in that email sadly doesn't
> > > > work although it would be nice if they did. I suspect this is why we're
> > > > using += since:
> > >
> > > We aren't using += today. We (openembedded-core) use ?=. meta-intel
> > > uses += and meta-ti is mixed (and I don't have meta-fsl-* handy).
> > >
> > > > > - The machine needs to say 'I need or support the following formats'
> > > >
> > > > so the machine ensures those formats exist at a minimum:
> > > >
> > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += "xxxx"
> > > >
> > > > > - The distro needs to say 'I always want format X'
> > > >
> > > > so the distro can do:
> > > >
> > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " yyy"
> > > >
> > > > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me only format X'
> > > >
> > > > This one is the problem case so the user has to use overrides:
> > > >
> > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES_override = "X"
> > > >
> > > > (where override can be MACHINE or forcevariable)
> > > >
> > > > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me what you support + X'
> > > >
> > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " X"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Whilst I think that is less than ideal since it forces use of overrides
> > > > in local.conf to override, changing the += in machine conf files doesn't
> > > > gain us much, it just breaks += in local.conf.
> > > >
> > > > I'm open to other feedback though...
> > >
> > > Well, I suggested ??= / ?= and posted some results from bitbake -e...
> >
> > Ok. += plays out as above. I realise its not what is in qemu.inc, it is
> > used in meta-intel though which I looked at after qemu.inc and I guess
> > has confused me.
> >
> > With ?= in machine.conf:
> >
> > The user defined IMAGE_FSTYPES would override the machine ones. Distro
> > can still append to it. The downside is a user append would not work out
> > as expected.
> >
> > So the question is which is the more user expected behaviour?
> >
> > =+ makes overwriting IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
> >
> > ?= makes appending IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
> >
> > I suspect a user is more likely to want to append than overwrite.
> > Getting an append to work with ?= is extremely non-obvious, even worse
> > syntax than the =+ overwriting case with overrides.
> >
> > So bottom line, I'm tempted to recommend we use =+.
> >
> > Further thoughts?
>
> Richard,
>
> So, what is the subtle difference between += that we started with and =+ that
> you recommended at the end? I realize those are for append and prepend, but
> are they handled any different? Was your recommendation to use =+ at the end,
> instead of += that was used originally, based on some specifics? Thanks.
I'm using += and =+ interchangeably. The contrast was with ?= which I
argued against. Order in this case doesn't matter and I have no
preference over += or =+, it simply doesn't matter.
Cheers,
Richard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
2012-03-28 21:11 ` Richard Purdie
@ 2012-03-28 23:29 ` Tom Rini
2012-03-29 9:51 ` Richard Purdie
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2012-03-28 23:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:11:44PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 14:54 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 05:56:16PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 09:25 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:15:13AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 10:35 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > > > As per
> > > > > > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-March/019772.html
> > > > > > a machine conf file should use '=' to set IMAGE_FSTYPES.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc | 2 +-
> > > > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > As someone pointed out, what I mentioned in that email sadly doesn't
> > > > > work although it would be nice if they did. I suspect this is why we're
> > > > > using += since:
> > > >
> > > > We aren't using += today. We (openembedded-core) use ?=. meta-intel
> > > > uses += and meta-ti is mixed (and I don't have meta-fsl-* handy).
> > > >
> > > > > > - The machine needs to say 'I need or support the following formats'
> > > > >
> > > > > so the machine ensures those formats exist at a minimum:
> > > > >
> > > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += "xxxx"
> > > > >
> > > > > > - The distro needs to say 'I always want format X'
> > > > >
> > > > > so the distro can do:
> > > > >
> > > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " yyy"
> > > > >
> > > > > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me only format X'
> > > > >
> > > > > This one is the problem case so the user has to use overrides:
> > > > >
> > > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES_override = "X"
> > > > >
> > > > > (where override can be MACHINE or forcevariable)
> > > > >
> > > > > > - The user needs to say 'I know best, give me what you support + X'
> > > > >
> > > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES += " X"
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Whilst I think that is less than ideal since it forces use of overrides
> > > > > in local.conf to override, changing the += in machine conf files doesn't
> > > > > gain us much, it just breaks += in local.conf.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm open to other feedback though...
> > > >
> > > > Well, I suggested ??= / ?= and posted some results from bitbake -e...
> > >
> > > Ok. += plays out as above. I realise its not what is in qemu.inc, it is
> > > used in meta-intel though which I looked at after qemu.inc and I guess
> > > has confused me.
> > >
> > > With ?= in machine.conf:
> > >
> > > The user defined IMAGE_FSTYPES would override the machine ones. Distro
> > > can still append to it. The downside is a user append would not work out
> > > as expected.
> > >
> > > So the question is which is the more user expected behaviour?
> > >
> > > =+ makes overwriting IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
> > >
> > > ?= makes appending IMAGE_FSTYPES hard
> > >
> > > I suspect a user is more likely to want to append than overwrite.
> > > Getting an append to work with ?= is extremely non-obvious, even worse
> > > syntax than the =+ overwriting case with overrides.
> > >
> > > So bottom line, I'm tempted to recommend we use =+.
> > >
> > > Further thoughts?
> >
> > Richard,
> >
> > So, what is the subtle difference between += that we started with and =+ that
> > you recommended at the end? I realize those are for append and prepend, but
> > are they handled any different? Was your recommendation to use =+ at the end,
> > instead of += that was used originally, based on some specifics? Thanks.
>
> I'm using += and =+ interchangeably. The contrast was with ?= which I
> argued against. Order in this case doesn't matter and I have no
> preference over += or =+, it simply doesn't matter.
So I guess I'll spin everything one more time and drop the meta-intel
version and we'll just use += since that's the common one.
--
Tom
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES
2012-03-28 23:29 ` Tom Rini
@ 2012-03-29 9:51 ` Richard Purdie
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Richard Purdie @ 2012-03-29 9:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 16:29 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:11:44PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 14:54 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 05:56:16PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 09:25 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > So, what is the subtle difference between += that we started with and =+ that
> > > you recommended at the end? I realize those are for append and prepend, but
> > > are they handled any different? Was your recommendation to use =+ at the end,
> > > instead of += that was used originally, based on some specifics? Thanks.
> >
> > I'm using += and =+ interchangeably. The contrast was with ?= which I
> > argued against. Order in this case doesn't matter and I have no
> > preference over += or =+, it simply doesn't matter.
>
> So I guess I'll spin everything one more time and drop the meta-intel
> version and we'll just use += since that's the common one.
Sounds good. Sorry about the churn on this one, I thought it was clear
+= and =+ were equivalent in this context.
Cheers,
Richard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-03-29 10:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-03-23 17:35 [PATCH] qemu.inc: Use '=' for IMAGE_FSTYPES Tom Rini
2012-03-26 9:15 ` Richard Purdie
2012-03-26 16:25 ` Tom Rini
2012-03-26 16:56 ` Richard Purdie
2012-03-26 17:13 ` Tom Rini
2012-03-26 18:39 ` Darren Hart
2012-03-26 19:31 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2012-03-28 18:54 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2012-03-28 21:11 ` Richard Purdie
2012-03-28 23:29 ` Tom Rini
2012-03-29 9:51 ` Richard Purdie
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.