From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QPaGA-0002CO-MF for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 26 May 2011 15:05:55 +0200 Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 May 2011 06:02:35 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,272,1304319600"; d="scan'208";a="8105952" Received: from pgsmsx601.gar.corp.intel.com ([10.221.43.69]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 May 2011 06:02:34 -0700 Received: from shsmsx601.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.112) by pgsmsx601.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.43.69) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Thu, 26 May 2011 21:02:34 +0800 Received: from shsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com ([10.239.4.96]) by shsmsx601.ccr.corp.intel.com ([10.239.4.112]) with mapi; Thu, 26 May 2011 21:02:33 +0800 From: "Lu, Lianhao" To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 21:02:31 +0800 Thread-Topic: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/5] conf/bitbake.conf: Added variables for PR service. Thread-Index: AcwboxEOl5sVfB+FS+eevJV0mwDbGgAAKW/Q Message-ID: References: <82b5b89412bfcac2d4586d183a3b6a516b5a0f35.1306401007.git.lianhao.lu@intel.com> <1306411147.2525.326.camel@phil-desktop> <1306414026.2525.337.camel@phil-desktop> In-Reply-To: <1306414026.2525.337.camel@phil-desktop> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: zh-CN, en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] conf/bitbake.conf: Added variables for PR service. X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 13:05:55 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Phil Blundell wrote on 2011-05-26: > On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 20:43 +0800, Lu, Lianhao wrote: >> The problem is that in OE-core the default -deb/-dbg packages are >> all using EXTENDPV, as well as some other recipes. Do you mean we >> should make them all using EXTENDPKGV instead of EXTENDPV? >=20 > As far as I can tell, yes, that would be the right thing to do. > That's what I was thinking of when I mentioned the "couple of uses" befor= e. > The only reason I hesitate is that, although the current behaviour > looks like it should be wrong, nobody has actually complained about it > and that makes me wonder if I have misunderstood something. >=20 > I guess someone needs to do a few tests to figure out what exactly is > going on there. But I am fairly sure that creating a hybrid PV+PKGR > is not a good thing to do; it should be either one thing or the other, > and as far as I know everything on the output side should be using PKGxx. >=20 Maybe all the recipes are using the PKGV default value (?=3D ${PV}, so this= just happens to make EXTENDPKGV equal to EXTENDPV. In what situation we sh= ould use EXTENDPV but not EXTENDPKGV then? Best Regards, Lianhao