From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f68.google.com (mail-wm1-f68.google.com [209.85.128.68]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.442.1589405507485671015 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:31:47 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.s=google header.b=Y0gdSqJp; spf=pass (domain: linuxfoundation.org, ip: 209.85.128.68, mailfrom: richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org) Received: by mail-wm1-f68.google.com with SMTP id k12so28052331wmj.3 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:31:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iupeLZ+d4exD1pyUf/B2aN/zl1GSGZTO5AyR5uS6rwg=; b=Y0gdSqJps/Zy/leRNtAUoO3uG3OVEy6hkO5BXnJvIkB7uGPD/zbhs3RfttusF4WCHz drYrt0K+7WC8yhAoh/Morc3qQl9sgtJ5ilgteFfZb/58OdqAjT/b0z1a1N88AB+RGYnr bYvLIRQb2YTKqxcqfp57TUrFF0rkHQiHdIT2k= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iupeLZ+d4exD1pyUf/B2aN/zl1GSGZTO5AyR5uS6rwg=; b=ayxNI35u4CGREx0GH7rUAHcCUdFb3YvnrTw2c4bOjjbRuBwDx4PNEsH0w/SxZJYnBk dUf1QED0GVMTFL9bF09la63u+ljd49aRv8OoBjMecakHl7P8DeTBRq2ZHbvkwk8TUbDx dKVdXk81mM6uOyB9+frrXr9/CUA4mQ95AF6f7PRzL5ynvEvG5eQUjASwgXpvoP2fTkbV oP6uoOuat+SpT8Ker3S33/7ciOTQPmPjJy/0CigumGsZNyzXM6v2i5PvDhHc3VIuMDF6 AEEcED7vrC6qDv7h+NQ7K7KYGjNOAS2rN+MrmLVwQl8HC4F5drhH3Tams4gPLmb7LwI1 XVig== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZ0bSW4MQKSzEvFxS7diCx1kEHnxlMNCXpD2C4x7VmBUmtxIAbJ 2L45AW9Juw+Zv6XKn9PCwdA9cA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKmtlBHTBnQjdf5eVE/mkMNIDxuwTxNntcHEk/BL1gfgCmP0icwWM/1LxxotqsL4UHXXehZoA== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c399:: with SMTP id s25mr43458931wmj.169.1589405505969; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:31:45 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from hex (5751f4a1.skybroadband.com. [87.81.244.161]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p4sm1173530wrq.31.2020.05.13.14.31.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 13 May 2020 14:31:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <764c9a365a510d22a5df20e4e510c4e9e4ab633b.camel@linuxfoundation.org> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] file: Remove unneccessary override of PACKAGECONFIG for native From: "Richard Purdie" To: Andre McCurdy , Peter Kjellerstedt Cc: OE Core mailing list Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 22:31:44 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <20200512214255.20678-1-pkj@axis.com> <12d3b34c48784a218feef04fbc1463e4@XBOX03.axis.com> User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.1-2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2020-05-13 at 12:30 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote: > Yes. Unfortunately making recipes robust for users who want to change > PACKAGECONFIG values doesn't seem to be a high priority for oe-core. > Why else would default PACKAGECONFIG values be assigned with ??= > instead of ?= other than as a trap for new users? I'm not sure I understand that, equally I'm tired so I'll assume I'm just missing something. I will say that there is no intention to make OE-Core hard to use or not robust, its only as good a the people contributing make it. In this case I'm not sure I understand/see the problem. If we should be using ?= instead of ??= then I'm open to an explanation why and patches to improve things. Unfortunately we do have quite some legacy and ??= vs ?= has been troublesome in the many different contexts we have (recipe, class, conf, inc and so on). Cheers, Richard