From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E12C77E32 for ; Tue, 16 May 2017 14:04:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 May 2017 07:04:27 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.38,349,1491289200"; d="scan'208";a="87466017" Received: from kanavin-desktop.fi.intel.com (HELO [10.237.68.161]) ([10.237.68.161]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 May 2017 07:04:26 -0700 To: Patrick Ohly References: <79e18217-d4ed-8356-9532-7da63a420d6f@topic.nl> <1494922912.1179.306.camel@intel.com> <1494942469.28624.10.camel@intel.com> From: Alexander Kanavin Message-ID: <4da20a5f-4d38-e3fb-b31e-f42ce8505564@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 17:02:21 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1494942469.28624.10.camel@intel.com> Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/6] development vs. production builds X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 14:04:26 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 05/16/2017 04:47 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > Then why is not already done like that in practice? Is it just because > OE-core and Poky set such a bad precedence with teaching developers to > add EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES ?= "debug-tweaks" to make the images usable, > and then that approach gets copied? It is done like that already, it's just not very consistent from what I can see. For example, core-image-sato-dev.bb: ============= require core-image-sato.bb DESCRIPTION = "Image with Sato for development work. It includes everything \ within core-image-sato plus a native toolchain, application development and \ testing libraries, profiling and debug symbols." IMAGE_FEATURES += "dev-pkgs" ============= > I think everyone agrees that removing "debug-tweaks" would be a good > idea. But completely removing the global (sic!) EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES in > local.conf.sample would go even further, and I am not sure how the > reactions to that would be. I suspect there are people who find it > useful to have just one image recipe that gets build in different > configurations (dangerous and not so dangerous). I'm not sure either, but I think that's not actually a bad idea - dropping support for it altogether. :) I'm not a big fan of placing INHERIT into local.conf either, by the way. I believe in functional programming principles, and this goes directly against them. Alex