Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] amd-gpu-bin-mx51: new recipe

[Javier Viguera <javier.viguera@digi.com>]

Hi Eric,

On 29/05/13 20:01, Eric Bénard wrote:
> diff --git a/recipes-graphics/amd-gpu-x11-bin/amd-gpu-bin-mx51_11.09.01.bb b/recipes-graphics/amd-gpu-x11-bin/amd-gpu-bin-mx51_11.09.01.bb
> +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(mx5)"

> diff --git a/recipes-graphics/amd-gpu-x11-bin/amd-gpu-x11-bin-mx51_11.09.01.bb b/recipes-graphics/amd-gpu-x11-bin/amd-gpu-x11-bin-mx51_11.09.01.bb
>   COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'x11', '(mx5)', '', d)}"

I'm still learning yocto/openembedded so bear with me if all the
following does not make sense, but is this correct?

When DISTRO_FEATURES contains x11, *both* packages will have:

COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(mx5)"

so both will be available.

When DISTRO_FEATURES does *NOT* contain x11, then:

amd-gpu-bin-mx51:     COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(mx5)"
amd-gpu-x11-bin-mx51: COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = ""

But in this case if i have not misunderstood the semantics of
COMPATIBLE_MACHINE both will be again available as an empty
COMPATIBLE_MACHINE means that it's available.

Not sure it it's very elegant, but i have seen in meta-openembedded
layer something similar using "Invalid!" string to invalidate one or
the other recipe depending on the distro feature.

Shouldn't then be something like the following:

amd-gpu-bin-mx51:
COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'x11', 'Invalid!', '(mx5)', d)}"

amd-gpu-x11-bin-mx51:
COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'x11', '(mx5)', 'Invalid!', d)}"

- 
Javier Viguera
Software Engineer
Digi International® Spain S.A.U.