* ALLOW_EMPTY versus ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}? a couple clarifications
@ 2012-07-06 13:10 Robert P. J. Day
2012-07-06 14:18 ` Marcin Juszkiewicz
2013-03-03 15:56 ` Richard Purdie
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2012-07-06 13:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: OE Core mailing list
just trying to clarify the gory details of the ALLOW_EMPTY setting.
first, across several .bb files, there is a mixture of these two:
ALLOW_EMPTY = "1"
ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"
what's the difference? what does the first one represent if you're
not specific? does that cover *all* generated packages?
next, i assume there's no real value to hardcoding the package name,
as in:
./meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-utils_1.0.25.bb:ALLOW_EMPTY_alsa-utils = "1"
(i assume the above could have just used the standard "_${PN}",
right?)
i think that might be everything for now.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: ALLOW_EMPTY versus ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}? a couple clarifications
2012-07-06 13:10 ALLOW_EMPTY versus ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}? a couple clarifications Robert P. J. Day
@ 2012-07-06 14:18 ` Marcin Juszkiewicz
2012-07-06 16:51 ` Robert P. J. Day
2013-03-03 15:56 ` Richard Purdie
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Marcin Juszkiewicz @ 2012-07-06 14:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core
W dniu 06.07.2012 15:10, Robert P. J. Day pisze:
>
> just trying to clarify the gory details of the ALLOW_EMPTY setting.
> first, across several .bb files, there is a mixture of these two:
>
> ALLOW_EMPTY = "1"
> ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"
>
> what's the difference? what does the first one represent if you're
> not specific? does that cover *all* generated packages?
Yes, first means "all packages may be empty"
> next, i assume there's no real value to hardcoding the package name,
> as in:
>
> ./meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-utils_1.0.25.bb:ALLOW_EMPTY_alsa-utils = "1"
>
> (i assume the above could have just used the standard "_${PN}",
> right?)
${PN} should be in this case.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: ALLOW_EMPTY versus ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}? a couple clarifications
2012-07-06 14:18 ` Marcin Juszkiewicz
@ 2012-07-06 16:51 ` Robert P. J. Day
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2012-07-06 16:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> W dniu 06.07.2012 15:10, Robert P. J. Day pisze:
> >
> > just trying to clarify the gory details of the ALLOW_EMPTY setting.
> > first, across several .bb files, there is a mixture of these two:
> >
> > ALLOW_EMPTY = "1"
> > ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"
> >
> > what's the difference? what does the first one represent if you're
> > not specific? does that cover *all* generated packages?
>
> Yes, first means "all packages may be empty"
and just to be clear, that means not just the default packages
(regular, -dev, -doc, etc.) but all additional packages that might be
defined for that recipe?
> > next, i assume there's no real value to hardcoding the package name,
> > as in:
> >
> > ./meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-utils_1.0.25.bb:ALLOW_EMPTY_alsa-utils = "1"
> >
> > (i assume the above could have just used the standard "_${PN}",
> > right?)
>
> ${PN} should be in this case.
i thought so, just wanted to be sure. i'm collecting all these
oddities i run across and am compiling my version of an OE "style
guide", which will contain pedantic observations like:
* don't hard-code a package name if you can use ${PN} instead
and
* there's no point setting ${PR} to "r0" since that's the default
little things like that.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: ALLOW_EMPTY versus ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}? a couple clarifications
2012-07-06 13:10 ALLOW_EMPTY versus ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}? a couple clarifications Robert P. J. Day
2012-07-06 14:18 ` Marcin Juszkiewicz
@ 2013-03-03 15:56 ` Richard Purdie
2013-03-03 16:15 ` Martin Jansa
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Richard Purdie @ 2013-03-03 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 09:10 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> just trying to clarify the gory details of the ALLOW_EMPTY setting.
> first, across several .bb files, there is a mixture of these two:
>
> ALLOW_EMPTY = "1"
> ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"
>
> what's the difference? what does the first one represent if you're
> not specific? does that cover *all* generated packages?
FWIW, a package name should generally be specified. I've just sent a
patch to OE-Core updating the various references.
Cheers,
Richard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: ALLOW_EMPTY versus ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}? a couple clarifications
2013-03-03 15:56 ` Richard Purdie
@ 2013-03-03 16:15 ` Martin Jansa
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Martin Jansa @ 2013-03-03 16:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Purdie; +Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 949 bytes --]
Can you please add ALLOW_EMPTY to sanity check like R* variables are now?
On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Richard Purdie <
richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 09:10 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > just trying to clarify the gory details of the ALLOW_EMPTY setting.
> > first, across several .bb files, there is a mixture of these two:
> >
> > ALLOW_EMPTY = "1"
> > ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN} = "1"
> >
> > what's the difference? what does the first one represent if you're
> > not specific? does that cover *all* generated packages?
>
> FWIW, a package name should generally be specified. I've just sent a
> patch to OE-Core updating the various references.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1524 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-03-03 16:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-07-06 13:10 ALLOW_EMPTY versus ALLOW_EMPTY_${PN}? a couple clarifications Robert P. J. Day
2012-07-06 14:18 ` Marcin Juszkiewicz
2012-07-06 16:51 ` Robert P. J. Day
2013-03-03 15:56 ` Richard Purdie
2013-03-03 16:15 ` Martin Jansa
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.