[meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES

[meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES

[raj.khem]

From: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>

Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
---
 meta-efl/conf/layer.conf   |    4 ++--
 meta-gnome/conf/layer.conf |    4 ++--
 meta-gpe/conf/layer.conf   |    4 ++--
 meta-oe/conf/layer.conf    |    4 ++--
 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/meta-efl/conf/layer.conf b/meta-efl/conf/layer.conf
index 85dbacd..f019337 100644
--- a/meta-efl/conf/layer.conf
+++ b/meta-efl/conf/layer.conf
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
-BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
+BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
 
 # We have a recipes directory, add to BBFILES
-BBFILES := "${BBFILES} ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bb ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend"
+BBFILES += "${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bb ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend"
 
 BBFILE_COLLECTIONS += "efl-layer"
 BBFILE_PATTERN_efl-layer := "^${LAYERDIR}/"
diff --git a/meta-gnome/conf/layer.conf b/meta-gnome/conf/layer.conf
index c878ecf..6e8ff28 100644
--- a/meta-gnome/conf/layer.conf
+++ b/meta-gnome/conf/layer.conf
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
-BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
+BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
 
 # We have a recipes directory, add to BBFILES
-BBFILES := "${BBFILES} ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bb ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend"
+BBFILES += "${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bb ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend"
 
 BBFILE_COLLECTIONS += "gnome-layer"
 BBFILE_PATTERN_gnome-layer := "^${LAYERDIR}/"
diff --git a/meta-gpe/conf/layer.conf b/meta-gpe/conf/layer.conf
index d250555..006b6af 100644
--- a/meta-gpe/conf/layer.conf
+++ b/meta-gpe/conf/layer.conf
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
-BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
+BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
 
 # We have a recipes directory, add to BBFILES
-BBFILES := "${BBFILES} ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bb ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend"
+BBFILES += "${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bb ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend"
 
 BBFILE_COLLECTIONS += "gpe-layer"
 BBFILE_PATTERN_gpe-layer := "^${LAYERDIR}/"
diff --git a/meta-oe/conf/layer.conf b/meta-oe/conf/layer.conf
index 9fa60c1..36137e9 100644
--- a/meta-oe/conf/layer.conf
+++ b/meta-oe/conf/layer.conf
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
-BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
+BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
 
 # We have a recipes directory, add to BBFILES
-BBFILES := "${BBFILES} ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bb ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend"
+BBFILES += "${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bb ${LAYERDIR}/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend"
 
 BBFILE_COLLECTIONS += "openembedded-layer"
 BBFILE_PATTERN_openembedded-layer := "^${LAYERDIR}/"
-- 
1.7.4.1

Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 06-05-11 05:47, raj.khem@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>


>  # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
> -BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
> +BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"

I haven't had my morning coffee yet, but that either doesn't prepend
LAYERDIR to BBPATH or the colons are in the wrong place.


regards,

Koen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFNw4mZMkyGM64RGpERAsNyAJ9UJ4GJ6blWQaYpCRO6s2v9N55jDQCdHeoR
gGUq5MZHntHS6d42OzHwjCM=
=G4SQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES

[Khem Raj]

-Khem

On May 5, 2011, at 10:39 PM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 06-05-11 05:47, raj.khem@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
> 
> 
>> # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
>> -BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
>> +BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
> 
> I haven't had my morning coffee yet, but that either doesn't prepend
> LAYERDIR to BBPATH or the colons are in the wrong place.
> 

Hmm I have sent similar patch for oe-core, git am that too and for other layers as well
Now bit bake should arrange BBPATH per priority
> 
> regards,
> 
> Koen
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
> 
> iD8DBQFNw4mZMkyGM64RGpERAsNyAJ9UJ4GJ6blWQaYpCRO6s2v9N55jDQCdHeoR
> gGUq5MZHntHS6d42OzHwjCM=
> =G4SQ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES

[Phil Blundell]

On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 20:47 -0700, raj.khem@gmail.com wrote:
>  # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
> -BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
> +BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"

This patch seems to cause the code to do the opposite of what the
comment says.  If changing it to be an append rather than a prepend is
deliberate, please adjust the comment to match.  (It would also be nice
to have some commentary in the commit message explaining why this is
being done, since it isn't obvious to me why append would be better.)

p.

Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES

[Khem Raj]

On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Phil Blundell <philb@gnu.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 20:47 -0700, raj.khem@gmail.com wrote:
>>  # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
>> -BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
>> +BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
>
> This patch seems to cause the code to do the opposite of what the
> comment says.  If changing it to be an append rather than a prepend is
> deliberate, please adjust the comment to match.  (It would also be nice
> to have some commentary in the commit message explaining why this is
> being done, since it isn't obvious to me why append would be better.)
>
That comment should be fixed. Since previously I has prepend and then
changed it to append but forgot
to correct the comment.
It needed to follow some order for consistency and I chose append. Now
it depends on the order of
layers specified in BBLAYERS from bblayer.conf. Which means 1st entry
gets priority
over second entry when bitbake searches BBPATH. Right now there are
two criteria's
BBFILES are selected per priority set by BBFILES_PRIORITY for the
layer but BBPATHs dont have this
capability they get searched as they appear in the list.  Ideally I
would think it would be simpler to have just one order for BBFILES and
BBPATH
so if BBPATHS followed the BBFILES priority too would make it easier
to comprehend.


> p.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>

Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 06-05-11 21:59, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Phil Blundell <philb@gnu.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 20:47 -0700, raj.khem@gmail.com wrote:
>>>  # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
>>> -BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
>>> +BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
>>
>> This patch seems to cause the code to do the opposite of what the
>> comment says.  If changing it to be an append rather than a prepend is
>> deliberate, please adjust the comment to match.  (It would also be nice
>> to have some commentary in the commit message explaining why this is
>> being done, since it isn't obvious to me why append would be better.)
>>
> That comment should be fixed. Since previously I has prepend and then
> changed it to append but forgot
> to correct the comment.
> It needed to follow some order for consistency and I chose append. Now
> it depends on the order of
> layers specified in BBLAYERS from bblayer.conf. Which means 1st entry
> gets priority
> over second entry when bitbake searches BBPATH. Right now there are
> two criteria's
> BBFILES are selected per priority set by BBFILES_PRIORITY for the
> layer but BBPATHs dont have this
> capability they get searched as they appear in the list.  Ideally I
> would think it would be simpler to have just one order for BBFILES and
> BBPATH
> so if BBPATHS followed the BBFILES priority too would make it easier
> to comprehend.

For meta-oe we need 2 different things:

1) prepend to BBPATH to get our classes in first (e.g. kernel.bbclass,
gnome.bbclass)
2) append to BBFILES to use our version of recipes (.bbs) and overrides
(.bbappends)

It seems that using layer priorities won't work the way we need it.

regards,

Koen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFNxGddMkyGM64RGpERAtQMAJwM1W5k0Z9CgxlBYq82O6b39kLDcwCfTNO7
Qv6TUjazbpj5vYb6Ex0nxWQ=
=J/NZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES

[Khem Raj]

On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 06-05-11 21:59, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Phil Blundell <philb@gnu.org> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 20:47 -0700, raj.khem@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>  # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
>>>> -BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
>>>> +BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
>>>
>>> This patch seems to cause the code to do the opposite of what the
>>> comment says.  If changing it to be an append rather than a prepend is
>>> deliberate, please adjust the comment to match.  (It would also be nice
>>> to have some commentary in the commit message explaining why this is
>>> being done, since it isn't obvious to me why append would be better.)
>>>
>> That comment should be fixed. Since previously I has prepend and then
>> changed it to append but forgot
>> to correct the comment.
>> It needed to follow some order for consistency and I chose append. Now
>> it depends on the order of
>> layers specified in BBLAYERS from bblayer.conf. Which means 1st entry
>> gets priority
>> over second entry when bitbake searches BBPATH. Right now there are
>> two criteria's
>> BBFILES are selected per priority set by BBFILES_PRIORITY for the
>> layer but BBPATHs dont have this
>> capability they get searched as they appear in the list.  Ideally I
>> would think it would be simpler to have just one order for BBFILES and
>> BBPATH
>> so if BBPATHS followed the BBFILES priority too would make it easier
>> to comprehend.
>
> For meta-oe we need 2 different things:
>
> 1) prepend to BBPATH to get our classes in first (e.g. kernel.bbclass,
> gnome.bbclass)
> 2) append to BBFILES to use our version of recipes (.bbs) and overrides
> (.bbappends)
>
> It seems that using layer priorities won't work the way we need it.

we can change the order in BBLAYERS define in oebb.sh to achieve that
so higest priority layer in terms of BBPATH appears first and so on

>
> regards,
>
> Koen
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
>
> iD8DBQFNxGddMkyGM64RGpERAtQMAJwM1W5k0Z9CgxlBYq82O6b39kLDcwCfTNO7
> Qv6TUjazbpj5vYb6Ex0nxWQ=
> =J/NZ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>

Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 07-05-11 01:09, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> On 06-05-11 21:59, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Phil Blundell <philb@gnu.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 20:47 -0700, raj.khem@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>  # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
>>>>>> -BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
>>>>>> +BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch seems to cause the code to do the opposite of what the
>>>>> comment says.  If changing it to be an append rather than a prepend is
>>>>> deliberate, please adjust the comment to match.  (It would also be nice
>>>>> to have some commentary in the commit message explaining why this is
>>>>> being done, since it isn't obvious to me why append would be better.)
>>>>>
>>>> That comment should be fixed. Since previously I has prepend and then
>>>> changed it to append but forgot
>>>> to correct the comment.
>>>> It needed to follow some order for consistency and I chose append. Now
>>>> it depends on the order of
>>>> layers specified in BBLAYERS from bblayer.conf. Which means 1st entry
>>>> gets priority
>>>> over second entry when bitbake searches BBPATH. Right now there are
>>>> two criteria's
>>>> BBFILES are selected per priority set by BBFILES_PRIORITY for the
>>>> layer but BBPATHs dont have this
>>>> capability they get searched as they appear in the list.  Ideally I
>>>> would think it would be simpler to have just one order for BBFILES and
>>>> BBPATH
>>>> so if BBPATHS followed the BBFILES priority too would make it easier
>>>> to comprehend.
> 
> For meta-oe we need 2 different things:
> 
> 1) prepend to BBPATH to get our classes in first (e.g. kernel.bbclass,
> gnome.bbclass)
> 2) append to BBFILES to use our version of recipes (.bbs) and overrides
> (.bbappends)
> 
> It seems that using layer priorities won't work the way we need it.
> 
>> we can change the order in BBLAYERS define in oebb.sh to achieve that
>> so higest priority layer in terms of BBPATH appears first and so on

That only fixes BBPATH, but not BBFILES :(
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD4DBQFNxOuGMkyGM64RGpERArpFAJ9HNwWB8IfyttZh46IZCo37unkcwACXQnZi
SCM+PoZfIwKgplELJyZD/A==
=2TIM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES

[Khem Raj]

On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 07-05-11 01:09, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>> On 06-05-11 21:59, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Phil Blundell <philb@gnu.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 20:47 -0700, raj.khem@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>  # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions
>>>>>>> -BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}"
>>>>>>> +BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch seems to cause the code to do the opposite of what the
>>>>>> comment says.  If changing it to be an append rather than a prepend is
>>>>>> deliberate, please adjust the comment to match.  (It would also be nice
>>>>>> to have some commentary in the commit message explaining why this is
>>>>>> being done, since it isn't obvious to me why append would be better.)
>>>>>>
>>>>> That comment should be fixed. Since previously I has prepend and then
>>>>> changed it to append but forgot
>>>>> to correct the comment.
>>>>> It needed to follow some order for consistency and I chose append. Now
>>>>> it depends on the order of
>>>>> layers specified in BBLAYERS from bblayer.conf. Which means 1st entry
>>>>> gets priority
>>>>> over second entry when bitbake searches BBPATH. Right now there are
>>>>> two criteria's
>>>>> BBFILES are selected per priority set by BBFILES_PRIORITY for the
>>>>> layer but BBPATHs dont have this
>>>>> capability they get searched as they appear in the list.  Ideally I
>>>>> would think it would be simpler to have just one order for BBFILES and
>>>>> BBPATH
>>>>> so if BBPATHS followed the BBFILES priority too would make it easier
>>>>> to comprehend.
>>
>> For meta-oe we need 2 different things:
>>
>> 1) prepend to BBPATH to get our classes in first (e.g. kernel.bbclass,
>> gnome.bbclass)
>> 2) append to BBFILES to use our version of recipes (.bbs) and overrides
>> (.bbappends)
>>
>> It seems that using layer priorities won't work the way we need it.
>>
>>> we can change the order in BBLAYERS define in oebb.sh to achieve that
>>> so higest priority layer in terms of BBPATH appears first and so on
>
> That only fixes BBPATH, but not BBFILES :(

BBFILES order does not matter its the BBFILES_PRIORITY that matters
when it comes to bitbake preferring recipes in contention
but some classes like metadata_scm.bbclass expects oe-core's entries
to appear first in the BBFILES list we can make that in oe-core
such that it prepends using =+ or even manually.

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
>
> iD4DBQFNxOuGMkyGM64RGpERArpFAJ9HNwWB8IfyttZh46IZCo37unkcwACXQnZi
> SCM+PoZfIwKgplELJyZD/A==
> =2TIM
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>