From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtpauth03.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net ([64.202.165.183]) by linuxtogo.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oj2Zh-0004VQ-Gk for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 06:05:59 +0200 Received: (qmail 32419 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2010 03:59:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (209.242.7.184) by smtpauth03.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.183) with ESMTP; 11 Aug 2010 03:59:03 -0000 Message-ID: <4C62200C.8070702@mwester.net> Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 22:59:08 -0500 From: Mike Westerhof User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100228 Thunderbird/2.0.0.24 Mnenhy/0.7.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <0B51A1E7C61D114DAE6FC10B0FD0ABA5018B5E82@deimsg40.de.net.world>

In-Reply-To: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 64.202.165.183 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mike@mwester.net X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: Why PREFERRED_VERSION setting of .conf overrules local.conf setting ? X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 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: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:05:59 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > 2010/8/10 Graham Gower : >> On 10 August 2010 04:31, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: >>> 2010/8/9 Chris Larson : >>>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Hauser, Wolfgang (external) < >>>> Wolfgang.Hauser.external@eads.com> wrote: > >>>> PREFERRED_VERSION__local = "xxx" is how you use the override. >>> The real solution woud be to either temporary store the >>> PREFERRED_VERSION and apply it later on. >>> Alternately we could parse local.conf twice, the first time ignoring >>> the PREFERRED lines, and the 2nd time only looking at these. >>> Yet another solution could be to split local.conf into two pieces, one >>> with settings like MACHINE and DISTRO, the other one with the >>> overrides. >> Wouldn't it be far simpler to fix the distro conf file(s)? E.g. apply >> something like this: >> s/^PREFERRED_VERSION_\([a-z]*\) =/PREFERRED_VERSION_\1 ?=/ > > Yeah. > Didn't really think about that one, but if distro's want to change and > adhere to it, that would be the simplest solution > Machines that pin something should probably also use weak binding. > Conceptually it is probably marginally less desirable than a solution > where local.conf has *always* control. > > What do the distro's think about this? I think it is the decision of EACH DISTRO to make, and not something to be dictated by OE in general. Mind you, I appreciate the general recommendation -- it's a sound idea to make it so that a knowledgeable developer's local.conf overrides most distro preferred version settings. I use the technique frequently. But on the other hand, I appreciate the ability to lock down some preferred versions where I feel that it simply doesn't make sense to let local.conf override. For example, there's usually a LOT more to changing the kernel version for SlugOS than just setting PREFERRED_VERSION. By the time a developer has figured out OE well enough so they can find the distro conf files and understand how they work, then I expect they also understand what extra stuff they need to do for the kernel as well. (Not to mention that I could - and should - add some comments in the distro conf file to explain how that all works, which is something I can't do in a generic local.conf file quite so well.) It's a trivial point; if the community wants to begin to dictate such little nuances to distros, it's not important enough to me to argue. But you asked what the distros think, so I answered. :) -Mike (mwester)